Ten reasons to vote Lib Dem

I would like to share a fantastic article with you. It was written by Elaine Bagshaw, Chair of Liberal Youth, and was published in the Student Times. You can find the original here, it's on page 12.

Elaine Bagshaw, Chair of Liberal Youth, the youth and student wing of the Liberal Democrats, gives us 10 reasons why Students should vote Lib Dem at the next election after 12 awful years of let downs from the Labour government.

1 - We deserve better

Students have been let down time and time again by Labour. We’re talking about more than just tuition fees and the Iraq war. If you’re in your final year, it’s likely you will end up joining the ranks of the thousands of unemployed graduates we now have. Labour’s mismanagement of the economy means that graduates now have far fewer opportunities than you would have 12 years ago when Labour first came to power. It is an utter outrage that 60% of all those unemployed are aged under 25 - Labour has created a lost generation. We will not let young people and students down. Our policies will ensure that you have a future. We will invest in a sustainable, green economy; invest in your education and make getting on the property ladder an achievable dream.

2 - We are the only party to oppose tuition fees

Tuition fees have led to the commercialisation of education and put talented young people off pursuing higher education due to the debt burden they would incur. You will leave University with a debt of around £20,000 - for the simple reason that you wanted to pursue your education and talent. We will scrap tuition fees and reinstate your right to a free education. Ensuring that

every young person who is talented enough to go to University, has the opportunity.

3 - We will act now to prevent climate change and secure our future

Massive environmental change is a reality. Whilst you’re reading this, ice caps are melting, species are dying out and people are suffering due to extreme changes in climate. Unless we act now, changes to our climate will hit the world’s pooerest hard. We would invest in a green road out of the recession, investing in clean technologies and swapping income taxes for environmental taxes. We’ve had enough of excuses, and if you have too, then it’s time to join us in our fight for action: www.liberalyouth.org/climate

4 - We oppose, and always have opposed ID cards

I.D. cards are a terrible infringementon our civil liberties, and an extension of Labour’s continually authoritarian regime. ID Cards work on the premise that the goverment has a right to all your personal details. Government ministers have admitted that the scheme will not cut crime and will not protect the country against terrorism. Yet they still pressed on with the costly project. The government tries to argue that the scheme is not compulsory, yet they will be forcing anyone who gets a passport to also get an identity card. The Liberal Democrats would scrap the costly ID Card Scheme and would instead reinvest in measures to cut crime. This would include hiring another 10,000 bobbies on the beat - to protect your and many other

local areas. Whilst the government dithers on ID Cards, the Liberal Democrats are proposing real solutions to cut crime.

5 - We believe in free speech

At the moment, it is illegal to protest within half a mile of Parliament without the prior consent of

the police. In exactly the place where voters concerns should be heard, the government are silencing them. It is an absolute disgrace that people have been arrested in the UK for the act of protesting against the government - this is not a sign of a healthy democracy. One of the first actions of a Liberal Democrat government would be to role back these laws and give people back their right to protest. In a democracy, everyone should be allowed their voice - whether it agrees with the government or not.

6 - We opposed the Iraq war

We were the only main party to oppose the Iraq war, and we have consistently called for an

independent inquiry into the war. When Tony Blair and the Labour government were engaged

in sabre-rattling and the politics of fear, the Conservatives stood on the sidelines and cheered

with them. Only the Liberal Democrats had the courage and conviction to say no. To stand on the side of international law and justice and say that there was no just cause for the war.

We will ensure that international law is respected, strengthen the United Nations and continue to promote development in the Third World.

7 - Vince. Was. Right.

Now, I know this sounds like bragging, but then again we have reason to brag! For over two years before the economic crisis really hit home with the collapse of Northern Rock, Vince was challenging the Government, and being slated for arguing that the debt bubble would eventually burst and that banks were being reckless with their lending. But Vince wasn’t just right in seeing it coming. He’s the only leading politician to have set out a plan for recovery, including proposals to ensure that such a crisis does not happen again. Nick is also the only leader of a major political

party to have set out his plans to ensure that the economy recovers but that people on low

incomes are still supported. This includes our plans to move the tax bands so that everyone

will have an extra £700 in their pocket, and 4 million people will be taken out of tax altogether.

8. We’d lower the voting age to 16

When you’re 16, the government says you’re responsible enough to bring a child into the world, but not responsible enough to vote. When you’re 16, the government demands that you pay taxation, yet gives you no say over the level of that taxation. When you’re 16, the government says you’re old enough to die for your country in war, but not old enough to have an influence over our foreign policy. The Liberal Democrats would give young people the trust and respect they deserve and lower the voting age to 16.

9 - We’d make votes count

At the last General Election, 19 million votes (70%!) made absolutely no difference to who

ended up being elected. The decision of who became government was left in the hands of 850,000 voters in swing seats. This means that although labour only won 37% of the vote, they gained 55% of the representation in Parliament. The Liberal Democrats would put an end

to this lunacy, and ensure that every vote cast would have an impact. This would end the

culture of ‘safe seats’ which allowed MPs to think they could get away with extortionate

expenses claims. This would remove the incentive for politicians to chace the votes of the middle

class few in marginal seats. This would give you a real say on our next Prime Minister.

10 - We’re the only ones who can get us out of this mess

The Liberal Democrats are the only party with a real plan for the economy. Labour have dithered and the Tories are too scared to say what they will do. The Liberal Democrats have a clear way out of the financial mess Britain finds itself in. We will find the unemployed productive work. There is no shortage of socially useful tasks – improving homes, environmental projects, care work – which can be undertaken on the basis of voluntary sector and local government initiatives. There are also some imaginative private sector schemes like the plan to create half a million IT jobs. There must also be more apprenticeships to ensure that our generation learns skills and trades. We will invest our way out of the economic crisis through green technology. This will mean investment in tidal power, high speed rail, carbon capture and storage, and telecommunications infrastructure. These measures will create jobs and stimulate the economy, whilst protecting our environment. We provide a green route out of the economic mess that ensures there is an economy and environment for our generation to enjoy.

Conclusion

We know there are people who agree with a lot of what we’ve got to say but who still don’t

vote Liberal Democrat. You don’t think we’re contenders - we urge you to think again.

If you don’t agree with our policies. If you don’t want big change in Britain. Then don’t vote

for us. But if you like what you hear. If you share our vision for a different kind of future, then

go with your instincts and vote Liberal Democrat.

Elections are decided by your cross on the ballot paper. Power is not any party’s to be inherited. Power is yours to give to whoever you choose.

So don’t turn away, don’t stay at home, don’t vote Conservative just because you think it’s the

only option. If you want things to be different, really different, choose the party that is different.

Choose the Liberal Democrats.

Labour's Cardiff Mail: My response

Oh dear, it's happened again. Jenny Rathbone and her team have made me annoyed for the, oh, I've lost count of how many times it's happened now.

Basically, Labour's General Election Campaign leaflet comes in the shape of the Cardiff Mail, a quarterly report on what Labour have been up to in the area. Previous editions of the leaflet contained a mistruth about the Save The Vulcan campaign, suggesting it was a Labour campaign, when in fact it was a non-political campaign. You can find the WalesOnline story here.

So, when I was shown this edition, I knew it was going to be an interesting read, which would have to prompt a response. So, here it is:-

On the first page, Jenny Rathbone calls on Cardiff Council to ban junk food from schools, saying "It is a public health emergency that so many of our children arrive in school unable to concentrate because they have had nothing nourishing to eat. I call on Cardiff Council to end the practice of selling junk food and drinks in school immediately." A photo shows some children holding bottles of Coke and packets of crisps and chocolate accompanied with the caption "This is their breakfast!" and adds that "One third of all Cardiff's 7-14 year olds have no proper breakfast before going to school.

I cannot understand how this connection has been made. Firstly, if children have no breakfast, this is the fault of parents and guardians for not encouraging a breakfast to be eaten. Secondly, banning junk food will not solve this problem. When I was in school, we had vending machines selling crisps and chocolate, but I used to eat chocolate or crisps as a snack in my free periods to eat while working on coursework and the like.

And if you get rid of the junk food, half the students will bring in their own stuff from home and the other half will leave the school premises against the will of the school to get it. A very poorly thought out policy if you ask me.

Into the middle section. Here, we find the Cardiff Labour Party's "Beds correspondent" looking into an expenses claim for a bed made by Jenny Willott MP. The article quotes "As the place where Ms. Willott got hers is blacked out, our intrepid correspondent tracked some down on the internet, anything from £995 to £1355."

This appears to be more an exercise of "guess how many sweets there are in the jar" than a serious look into an MP's expense claims. They don't know how much was paid, so they guessed, and probably over-estimated for the sake of it. Sorrg guys, but again, in my opinion, that's not a story.

Then, the one that angered me the most. A story about the Lib Dems dropping their opposition to tuition fees. As a member of Liberal Youth I have had several assurances that the policy has not been dropped, but still Labour run with this story. In fact, in the last week, Clegg has been on telly and said he was against them. Click here to watch him say it.

Although on a personal level, I think it is incredibly insulting of the Labour Party to all the students like myself who will leave University with debts because they introduced student top-up fees, to try and untruthfully convince people that the Lib Dems have dropped their campaign against them, even though they haven't. And Labour can't even get the Student Loans Company, to pay up properly. They totally cocked up on paying out student loans this year, leaving some first years trying to live in a strange town or city with no money.

There is also a photo of Edwina Hart and Jenny at the Cardiff Royal Infirmary, or so it looks. The photo has clearly been photoshopped, with Edwina and Jenny being added to a stock photo of the CRI. But why would this have to be done? Surely it must be very easy for Edwina, who is at the Assembly every week, and Jenny, who is standing in the constituency where the CRI is located, to take a proper photo there? It's probably because of the fact that the CRI is quite a long way to travel to from Jenny's home in Islington.

It seems that, once again, all Labour have to offer in Cardiff Central is rants, lies and conjecture. No surprise there then. Oh, and on a personal note, in the event that the Labour PPC reads my blog, could you please moderate the comment I made about Bute Park on your site about three months ago? I really felt it was a good point, but you obviously disagree.

Bute Park Battlefield: No. 2

It seems that the Bute Parks Alliance refuses to retract their opposition to the access bridge in Bute Park. It does seem to be quite controversial to agree with anything Cardiff Council does these days, so I will be a rebel and press on with doing so.

My return to this issue has propped up for two reasons. Firstly, a Green Party activist brought up the issue at a public meeting I recently attended. Personally, I think for an environmentalist, she wastes an awful lot of her energy on ridiculous causes, feel free to check out her blogs (she has several) here and make your own mind up.

The second reason was that, on one of my occasional bike rides, I found myself in the park held up by a council vehicle as it had to reverse to let another one through, and actually saw the progress of the controversial bridge. Here is a picture for you all.

It's not a very good picture, but you can see the gap in the trees, one of the JCB's, the safety fencing and a building on North Road on the other side. It is also worth noting that trees will be replanted in this gap according to the plans, which are available for all to see on the North Road consruction site wall.

So, I will ask, if the bridge is causing minimal environmental damage (unlike the Royal Welsh College development which is even bigger than I thought it would be, and has brought no opposition by the Bute Park's Alliance) and means that council vehicles are using less of the park, then what on earth is their problem?

Call me whatever you like for saying this, but I am very much of the opinion that the people who are on this group either a) have been misinformed or scaremongered about the council's plans b) have vested interest politically in the area and are trying to make cheap electoral gain c) are delusional.

Plaid leader makes my day

It turns out my previous rant about Jenny Rathbone PPC was my fiftieth post on Blogger. Seems I was so annoyed by the woman I have now given the pseudonym "Jenny "Rant 'n' Scaremonger", I completely missed this important landmark. My post today is a much nicer affair.

After the success of the Ebbw Valley Railway's reopening a few years ago, taking twice as many passengers as expected, and work to introduce services to Newport planned to start in two years time, I was pleased to see Ieuan Wyn Jones, Assembly Transport Minister announcing another possible similar scheme.

Although a much smaller scheme, the Aberdare to Hirwaun extension of the Cynon Valley Line would still be an important step in getting people onto public transport as we look to reduce our carbon output. It might be only a 3 miles extension but it brings another Heads of The Valleys town a direct rail link to the capital city.

Of course, as a complete and utter train nerd, I want to see more of these schemes being announced, and sooner rather than later. Public transport is something that should be encouraged, and trains are much better than buses in terms of comfort and speed of travel, providing the lines go where you want them to. And clearly, the people agree. The Ebbw Vale link, as previously mentioned, was twice as popular as was predicted, and has already carried a million passengers to and from Cardiff. And trains are cheaper too. £3 gets me a return bus ticket in Cardiff, or a day time 16-25 return from Cardiff to Abercynon. No contest in value for money there.

So thank you Deputy First Minister for seeing the good that more railways can bring to our part of the world, so while your at it, I would ask you very nicely to consider the following:

Radyr to Coryton, Cardiff to Beddau, Carmarthen to Aberystwyth, Ebbw Vale Parkway to Ebbw Vale Town, and Llanhilleth to Abertillery, and opening new stations on existing lines at St. Fagans, Ely, Maindy, Roath, Roath Park, St. Mellons, Llanwern, Pye Corner and Carno.

Scare mongering on the buses

Not many things make me angry. I am usually very mild mannered with my approach to ideology and opinion, but recently someone has really been winding me up the wrong way. The person in question is Jenny Rathbone, Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Cardiff Central, who, over the last few months has, from where my eyes are looking, done nothing but moan and scaremonger.

First of all, she opposed, and moaned about the new "road through Bute Park", which as I mentioned previously, is an access point for park vehicles rather than a public right of way. Then, she decided that the Council weren't cleaning the Aneurin Bevan statue in Queen Street as often as she'd like it cleaned, even though there has been large construction works going on the area for at least a year.

Now, I find a letter written to the South Wales Echo viewpoints page by herself, moaning about the new bus system in the city centre, in which she accused the council of only consulting the major tenants from the new shopping centre, and suggested that Delme Bowen, council member responsible for transport would probably be selling off the central bus and rail station for more retail space.

As far as I can see, the bus station cannot be sold off because of the huge numbers of buses coming into the city, whether they be local Cardiff Bus services, or private companies from the nearby Valleys or National Express and Megabus coaches. However, the bus station does need knocking down and rebuilding.

In my opinion, this letter represents a complete fabrication, a bending of the truth designed to win votes, and at times when people are trusting elected politicians less, this in my opinion is a despicable way for someone who is running for public office to behave.

Reading letters like this makes me more determined as a local party activist to keep people like this out of Westminster. We have just had a major scandal where many of the dishonest MP's have stood down, or will be doing so at the next election. Electing people like Jenny Rathbone to replace them is not going to solve anything, and I hope no-one has been taken in by her lies.

Call time on binge drinking by letting the teens into the pub

It seems one of the major public health problems we have in this country at the moment is binge drinking. In the short term, you have the cost of policing Friday and Saturday nights and queues of injured drunkards at A&E, in the long term you have people with liver failure and other alcohol related injuries out of work and pushing up the cost of health and welfare.

I would go so far to argue that certain people in my generation will never change their drinking habits. The current culture is as follows: Pre-load at home with cheap supermarket alcohol, skip the pub, and head straight to the club with the cheapest deals. Legislation on minimum pricing and no alcohol deals will only go so far to hold back the tide. And at the same time CAMRA are suggesting that there are five pubs closing every week in the UK.

I would like to explore an option which I personally think might work. It might be a bit controversial, but stick with me. Why don't we lower the legal drinking age in pubs to 16?

Let's face it, 16 year olds are already drinking heavy amounts, unsupervised, at home or in the park. They get the alcohol bought for them by older friends, siblings or parents and then get drunk. Would it not be better to encourage them into the pubs, where their drinking will be supervised by bar staff who would stop serving them once they have too much to drink?

This would clamp down on the binge drinking culture and encouraging them to drink responsibly when they start drinking, rather than stopping the habit of binging and getting wasted when it's too late to do so. As long as the legal age for the off-licence stays the same, then why would any 16 year olds want to drink outside in the cold unfriendly night time park when it is perfectly legal for them to go down their warm, friendly local?

This would also give the pub industry which is fighting to survive in some areas, a two-year head start on customer loyalties. Of course, once you turn 18, you can start going to clubs and buying supermarket booze, but if worked correctly they won't get smashed when they end up in the nightclubs, and they will prefer the pub to the house for drinking no matter how much cheaper it is.

It might be too late for my generation, but if we work this right, we can save the pub from the supermarket and save the next generation from themselves in one change of the law.

Why can't the bus take the strain?

Having seen the news of a transport partnership scheme between Admiral and Newport Bus set up by Ed Townsend (Parliamentary Candidate for Newport East), I was very impressed by the aims of the scheme and was given a brain wave by it.

For those of you who have not seen the news, Ed has managed to agree a partnership between the City's bus service provider and Admiral Insurance, a major employer in Newport, to lay on a bus service to the workplace, where there was no previous bus service, to help young people get to work safely and to encourage people to leave their cars at home, easing congestion and making all the difference in our fight against climate change.

But it reminded me of an issue we have a little closer to home.

I can think of two areas in Cardiff which are not currently served by the bus company which would be of benefit to commuters, and another which may do the same in the future, and these are Ocean Way (near the Port of Cardiff) and Cardiff Gate Business Park in Pontprennau. There are a significant number of commuters in this area who would have no choice but to drive a car to work, or to carshare.

Ocean Way is the most difficult of these two locations to send a bus as there is no service anywhere near it, and Cardiff Gate is a little easier because although a bus comes quite close to it, the terminus of the 57/58 route, you have to walk along a dual carriageway to get to the Business Park. Not a good idea in my opinion. And if the bus company sees that the route is not profitable, then perhaps some of the employers in the two areas would be willing to subsidise some of the cost. I know at least one company in Cardiff Gate who runs its own bus service for its employees, so it may be in a few companies interests to get something going.

The other area is at Junction 33. Currently there is only a service station here, but what if you could get a park and ride scheme going to pick up commuters from Llantrisant and Bridgend to keep their cars off the city's road network? And with the International Business Park proposed to be built here soon, a bus service would help here and possibly benefit the people in Creigiau and Pentyrch too.

So lets take this excellent scheme in Newport duplicated in Cardiff, and hopefully elsewhere too.

Conference Prep #2: Severn Tidal Scheme

Now we are onto tidal power. This one is an amalgamation of two blogs I wrote some time ago on the subject, but the issue is still very loaded and this is why I want to speak on this issue.

I am personally in favour of the smaller barrage for the area between the two road bridges. I would have liked to have seen the larger one built but it would have taken too long and would have been too expensive, although it would have provided 5% of the UK's energy needs. But we must at least build the smaller project, as tidal power is much more reliable than any other renewable energy source.

It would also be best placed for a new rail link to replace the seriously dilapidated Severn Rail Tunnel, which needs to be abandoned as soon as we have an alternative. A feat of engineering brilliance in its time, but it is way too expensive to keep open and disruptive to rail services when Network Rail have to physically pump out water from an underground river flowing through it.

Also, looking to the future, a lot of scientists are working on introducing hydrogen power in the UK when more research has been done, but the problem with this is you need energy to split the hydrogen out of water, and it has to be clean energy otherwise it misses the point of what hydrogen power is meant to achieve.

If the barrage is built, we will have both a large amount of renewable energy and a huge amount of fresh water flowing from the Severn, which would make South Wales a perfect base for hydrogen production companies, allowing high-skilled jobs to flourish in the area. And we could then be the epicentre of the new energy revolution, much like South Wales was in the Industrial Revolution.

OK, same principle as before, all constructive criticism welcome. Help me deliver a killer speech!

Conference Prep #1: Free Prescriptions

This is part of a series I will be doing over the next two weeks, as I am going to Welsh conference on the 16th and would really like to speak about some of my views. So I am going to post blogs which may end up as speeches, but I want people to comment on them so that I can improve them or drop them altogether if they are no good. Okay, here goes, free prescriptions is my first port of call.

When NHS Wales introduced free prescriptions after the Government of Wales Act, I remember thinking it was an excellent idea. The system that was in place before seemed unfair, and this looked like an improvement. But, this was before I had all the information placed in front of me.

It turned out that under the old system, which still exists in England, that anyone on Income Support, Pensions, or Income-based Jobseeker's Allowance, were already entitled to full help with paying prescription costs.

So the vast majority of people who were burdened by prescription charges were already covered by the state. But apparently, this wasn't enough. It almost seems to me that the Assembly was trying to use new laws to legitimise its own existence to the electorate, who were still undecided over whether the Assembly was a good thing.

The main issue as a result of free prescriptions is that GP's are finding more people turning up for appointments and asking for written prescriptions, even asking for paracetamol and cough syrups. After all, why buy Lemsip if you can get Amoxycillin at the doctors for nothing? As much as I love a freebie more than most, but I really think this is a freebie too far.

Especially, when the other problem we have is that not all drugs are available on the NHS. Several cancer drugs have been deemed "too expensive" to be handed out to sufferers, even though you can get a free prescription written for painkillers from the doctor, which you can pay about 50p for in a corner shop. This is not the NHS that I want. I want an NHS where all drugs are available, especially the ones that may save lives.

So, I call for us to have a policy against free prescriptions, and to go back the old system of giving the money back to those who struggle to pay or who depend on prescribed drugs to lead a normal life. Those with the ability to pay can then help finance the addition of the drugs deemed too expensive to be available.

So, how well was my view delivered? Have I got any of my facts wrong? Should I shorten it or bring something else to the table? Please let me know.

Tall story? Or small talk?

I had previously seen gags on internet motivational posters, and I think Have I Got News For You did a gag about the distinctively height lacking French President Nicolas Sarkozy, but today's BBC article about the French government going to extreme lengths to "cover up" the President's shortcomings.

Apparently, at a recent factory visit, the people in the official photoshoot were deliberately chosen because they were of either a shorter or similar stature to Mr Sarkozy, which the attached video seems to back up. Apparently Mr Sarkozy is incredibly touchy about his height as well, to the point where the 5' 5'' President requested a hidden platform when he spoke on the same stage as US President Barack Obama, who is much taller at 5' 11''.

I read this story with great interest for two very good reasons, the first being that I am about the same height as the French head of state, and that unlike many other shorties, I am not at all touchy about my circumstances.

I seem to remember getting a fair bit of stick for my height when I was in High School, which probably wasn't helped by hanging around with a guy who was at least a foot taller than me and easily the tallest in the year, which probably made us look like members of the Bash Street Kids. And although I did originally get bothered by some of the names, eventually, probably by the age of eighteen or so, I rose above it (excuse the pun).

But coming from a little man who would never even wear shoes with a hidden heel because I consider it to be untruthful, I don't understand why a politician would go to such lengths to cover up something as trivial as their height, especially as politicians are supposed to be seen as trustworthy. So if they will go to great lengths to add a few inches to their height, maybe their citizens should read their expense forms a little bit more carefully as well.

I suppose it could be down to image, as we often associate tall men to be more successful in both business and politics, and of course most women aspire to meet a tall, dark and handsome man. But also, a lot of the world's dictators have also been lacking in the vertical department, with Napoleon and Adolf Hitler being among them. Many people would even go as far to say that they were so touchy about their height that they went to great lengths to attempt to prove their "manhood", i.e. trying to create an empire for themselves.

I am personally of the belief that my short stature has been character forming, as when I did have a problem with it, the way that I tried to make myself a more attractive person was simply by being nicer to people. And when you do this, you realise that most people don't give a crap about the shape or size of your frame, it's more about the person on the inside.

So Mr Sarkozy, and other short men around the world, learn to accept your status. And don't go to ridiculous lengths to hide it either. Do what me and Richard Hammond do and let people take the mickey out of you for it. Brush off the worst gags, and be sure to congratulate the more original ones. Some of them can be pretty good!

Love football, hate racists

This morning I woke up to Radio 1's Newsbeat informing me that Blue Square Premier football club Luton Town had been forced to abandon their game against York City on September 19th as police announced they would be needed to keep the peace at a anti-Islamic extremist demonstration in the town on the same day, as the local force cannot provide a large enough police presence at both events.

The demonstration has been organised by the English Defence League, the same group that had a demonstration in Birmingham earlier this year which ended in violence and arrests. The event will almost certainly be attended by other far right groups, including the BNP, and I'm sure that UAF will show up to try and disrupt it as well. In short, there is a massive danger of a riot breaking out.

As annoyed as I am at the nature of the protest, I was even more annoyed by the fact that the organisers have, whether intentionally or not, disrupted another event that was taking place, a football match which will most certainly not break out into people hurling racist abuse or rocks at each other.

I have seen many other events which aim to disrupt the normal routines of people, from the traffic go-slow of the congestion charge or the Cardiff taxi drivers protesting about the number of cabs allowed in the city, and each one angers me greatly.

Because as much as I believe in the right to protest about things which affect you, as it is a key element of a democratic society, I have no time for any pressure groups who think that their cause is more important than the day to day lives of ordinary people. It is incredibly arrogant and in many ways, is detrimental to your cause, as anyone held up in the disruptions will be reluctant to support you. Their cause may be entirely worthy but most of the time if this is true then more acceptable forms of demonstration usually work to get things changed.

However as much as protestors of this nature should really be moved on by police, this may damage race relations in the town even further. Unfortunately, people who have a problem with Muslims usually tend to be quite thick as well, so when extremists launch a legitimate protest takes place against troops in Luton they find it difficult to understand why it was that they were not allowed to throw things at them, and a condemnation of the fact that the protest was allowed to happen ended up in the right wing gutter press, angering people nationwide.

The only hope that I have is that the board of the football club or the supporters club encourage the fans to distance themselves from the demonstration, and that nobody will turn up.

An eye opener at the Mardi Gras

Since I got involved volunteering with the Liberal Democrats, I have done a lot of things which I would not have done previously. I have knocked on people's doors to ask them to fill in surveys and spoken to total strangers about my political beliefs. This weekend, I did something else I never thought I would do.

I was invited to help out on the Lib Dems stall at the Mardi Gras, which was raising awareness of a Liberal Youth campaign. I had never previously seen the point of me going to the Mardi Gras, as I am straight, and in all honesty, I had never thought there was much of a problem with people being accepted due to their sexuality. I was brought up by very liberal parents, and grew up with an openly gay uncle, so I had never had any personal issues with gays, and I had (quite naively) assumed that nobody else had much of a problem with them either. However, almost everything that happened to me at that festival told me that this was one of the most idiotic assumptions I had ever made.

The first thing I did when I got to the Lib Dem stall was I read the campaign, and watched another guy canvassing people to sign the petition for it, so that I could build up enough confidence to do so myself. Then I read the relevant statistics and I was quite shocked.

According to Stonewall Cymru, only 6% of Welsh schools have specific policies for dealing with homophobic bullying. Of the remaining 94%, 75% of respondents said they had encountered homophobic bullying, 50% said they had been reluctant to go to school, another 50% had contemplated suicide, 40% had tried it, and 30% had tried it more than once. And then other things began to make sense. Out of all the openly gay people I know, quite a lot of them did not come out until they left school.

Our campaign was to encourage the Welsh Assembly's Education Minister to force a specific policy on homophobic bullying on all Welsh schools, which linked up to the bigger campaign that Liberal Youth had been running for three years called "Homophobia is Gay". And as I began speaking to people about our campaign and speaking to people about their own experiences of being openly homosexual in school, it dawned on me that there was a massive problem.

The other thing that happened to me was that I was talking to a lesbian couple about their experiences of school when they made a joke about me being gay myself, which was clearly an assumption they had made as I was canvassing people about gay rights at a gay pride festival. When I corrected them, one of the girls was so happy that a straight person was campaigning about gay rights that she gave me a massive hug!

So clearly, there is still a big problem with people being respected and accepted for being openly gay, and not many straight people are willing to stand up for gay rights. After my experience, I would encourage anyone who is tolerant enough to accept everyone for their differences to make a stand for those who are targeted by those who are afraid of their differences. And when gay-bashers such as the BNP have managed to get two seats in the European Parliament, there has never been a time when standing up for equal rights is so important.

Bute Park Battlefield

I know this is quite a pointless blog, as I had no problem with the project and that it's construction has already begun, but the whole saga including the anger surrounding it was a very interesting story, which taught me an awful lot about the way that politics works.

Of course, I am referring to Cardiff Council's controversial plans to build a new access road into Bute Park, for use by nursery vehicles and lorries carrying equipment for events in Cooper's field. The idea surrounding the plan is that once these vehicles no longer have to access the park at the gate opposite Boulevard de Nantes, the South side of the Park will be free from traffic interference.

Once that has been achieved the Council then plan to open the North Gate of Cardiff Castle, allowing greater pedestrian access to the park so that shoppers and workers alike are more likely to use this jewel in the crown of Cardiff City Centre.

Even though a consultation took place, and the Council had to submit their plans to CADW as the area is Grade I listed, protestors took the plans completely out of context and announced to the public that the Council had granted themselves planning permission to build a road through Bute Park. The way that is written makes it sound like Bute Park would become similar to the Clifton Downs, where a web of roads travel through them used by thousands of buses and cars, which is definitely not the case. And it's worth mentioning that I'm not criticising Clifton Downs either, the roads have definitely not managed to spoil them!

I think it is very worrying that we have a society that trusts sweeping statement pressure groups more than elected representatives, especially when it comes to things which would actually improve a City's green space rather than ruin it. But for months protesters and opposition political parties against the Lib Dem/Plaid alliance run council fought against the plans.

However, rather ironically, there is another development in Bute Park over the next few months which has had no opposition whatsoever. The Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama is having a massive redevelopment, and a quick look on Cardiff Council's online mapping portal shows that it will increase the plot size of the college.

I was down North Road not too long ago and Council workers are building a new path down to the canal bridge about 25 metres North from the current one. This is because the development is moving further north and the the current path has to move to make way. If this is the case, where is the Bute Parks Alliance's opposition?

As I mentioned, this is how politics works. A plan is made, a fringe minority is angered, so they use lies to attempt to make a vast majority angered, even though this majority would not exist if it were told the truth. Thankfully, they rarely succeed.

We are not laughing, well I'm not anyway

As much as I am a huge fan and constant supporter and defender of the BBC, I really cannot work out what they were thinking when they commissioned We Are Klang.

I saw it being heavily advertised as a new sitcom on BBC Three, and was initially intrigued because one of the actors plays the headmaster in E4's fantastic show The Inbetweeners. I tuned in for about five minutes when I was bored and found the show, well, to say the least, absolutely awful.

All I saw was two men hit another man with a mallet in much the same way as a cartoon character as even though they were hitting him in the old boy, he didn't appear to be hurt, and shouting about everything being stolen, including the police force, but not one of the character's mums, who then broke into song about her leaving because she hates her son so much.

Now, I must say very quickly, I am not going to go down the road of saying how offended I am by all this. I supported Wossie and Bwand when they "insulted" half the country by being "a bit Frank Spencer" about having sex with someone's grand-daughter, laughed when Jeremy Clarkson joked about lorry drivers murdering prostitutes because I saw his tongue was stuck firmly inside his cheek, and absolutely love Frankie Boyle for his black humour on Mock the Week, even if he is making jokes about the Queen's old girl (literally in this case).

I'm not even going to claim it's a waste of my licence fee, as explained in a previous post. I suppose I'm not even angry about it. Just baffled and confused, because I have no idea what it's target audience is.

I don't find it at all funny, in either a silly way or a black humour way, and I can't see who would relate to it. The only plausible answer that I can see is that CBBC ran out of space in its schedule, and even then I can see 10-year olds considering it a "bit too lowbrow".

Plus, it looks even worse when you consider the other stuff shown on BBC Three. Torchwood and Gavin and Stacey started off there before they were moved to BBC One as they became more popular and acclaimed, Being Human was pretty good, and they always have brilliant light-hearted documentaries such as those in the new Adult season, such as the programmes about teenage mothers and whether 16 year olds should get the vote, to which I say yes.

Please don't give We Are Klang other series BBC. When I am forced to criticise you, it feels like my soul is dying.

Two abreast is critical mass for me

I was recently alerted on a Facebook group about the amount of real cyclists who abhor mass cycling events in protest in something or another, usually cycle safety or oil usage or something. And when I mean real cyclists I mean the type who aren't a bunch of smelly hippies who don't have jobs and hate car drivers and other normal people.

Basically the idea of mass cycling is that you get as many cyclists as you can to cycle along a designated route, causing traffic jams and mass annoyance. And apparently this solves the problem they were protesting about.

I remember the first time I heard about the Naked Bike Ride in Cardiff. I was invited to go along but I politely rejected the idea for a number of reasons. One, it appears to be one big hippy fest, especially as everyone is naked. Secondly, I don't like the idea of two hundred inexperienced riders all trying to occupy the same piece of tarmac, all going at different paces and having different turning points. Metal is going to tangle.

Thirdly, YOU ARE NAKED. Real cyclists wear tight fitting lycra for a very good reason. When you crash, it protects your skin and makes sure you don't get any parts of your fragile body caught on parts of your not so fragile bike, such as chains, sprockets and gear levers. If you are naked, all manner of bits on your person are exposed. Call me old fashioned, but I really don't like the idea of my old boy caught between a sprocket and chain.

And even more ironic is the fact that the Naked Bike Ride in particular is designed to highlight the fragility of the cyclist. What a better way to do this than throwing away vital clothing, all bunching in together, and holding up pissed off car drivers who are in a metal box with 300 times the power of your legs.

Thank you very much, but I think I'll leave my clothes on and cycle two abreast at a maximum.

Improving local transport in Cardiff

Having read the Cardiff City Council Local Transport Plan last night, it seems that the transport planners in the city have in all fairness had some excellent ideas into how we can improve transport in the city.

One area that I took vast interest in for many reasons was the rail strategy. Cardiff has a heavy rail metro rail link, like other cities of a similar size such as Bristol. But as a common rail user I feel the network is not used to its full potential, which is a shame considering how useful it already is.

Rail is one of the easiest ways to move around in Cardiff. Cars are caught in congestion and although the council have put in bus lanes where they can, buses get stuck too. Rail in Cardiff typically only gets one vehicle in each direction four times an hour, so providing the signalling can handle more it would be quite easy to increase capacity.

Although many of these ideas have already been put forward to the council, this is what I think they should do to improve rail transport in the city.

SHORT TERM, i.e relatively cheap and easy.

- Treat Heath Low/High Level as one station, effectively making Heath Low Level into Heath Platform 3, and show all train times for each station on all timetables and electronic boards so commuters are aware of alternative trains into Cardiff.
- Combine Birchgrove and Ty Glas into one station at the mid-point between these two stations with pedestrian access alongside the line from both current sites. This way Coryton trains will only have to stop once rather than twice at two stations which are very close (within walking distance) to each other.
- Improve the rail to bus links. Have a bus stop outside as many stations as possible and try to synchronise their timetables, eg. Bus arrives at 0958, train arrives at 0959, train leaves at 1000, bus leaves at 1002. Also look into a combined city rail and bus day pass for £5 per day.
- Possibly build a turnback at Grangetown (if none currently exists) so the station can be added to the City Line, so trains would travel from Central to Grangetown and then to Ninian Park and vice versa on opposite line.

MEDIUM TERM i.e. more expensive, more difficult.

- Reopen fourth platform at Queen Street and build a bay platform for the Bay Shuttle. This is a difficult job as this would also include the provision of a four line rail bridge across Newport Road with Platform 1 and 2 serving Pontypridd trains and Platform 3 and 4 serving Rhymney and Coryton trains.
- There are no rail stations in the East of the City, even though the South Wales Main Line runs through it. Look into building rail stations at Splott Road Bridge (near the library) and at Trowbridge opposite the Freightliner terminal. These stations would be built on the relief (freight) line to minimise disruption to Intercity services and would be served by Ebbw Vale and Cheltenham trains.
- Look into building stations at Wedal Road Bridge and Crwys Road Bridge, served by all Rhymney and Coryton trains.
- Look into building a station at St. Fagans, served by Maesteg trains.
- Look into building a station at Cowbridge Road where the City Line crosses this road.
- Look into building stations at Maindy (next to the filling station) and Mynachdy. Mynachdy station also has a large area of brownfield land, presumably from a rail yard which could be turned into a car park for a Park and Ride facility. These stations would be served by all Pontypridd trains.

LONG TERM i.e. most expensive and ambitious.

- Electrify all Cardiff and Valley Lines. Once the South Wales Main Line has been electrified the infrastructure would be in place to do the same with our local routes.
- Loop the City Line at Radyr with the Coryton Line via the Taff Vale Railway cutting and build a new station at the Business Park near the Asda superstore. Encourage Park and Ride at this station. Would involve reclaiming part of a nature reserve (I'm sure the Bute Parks Alliance will be happy) and building a new railway bridge across the Taff. Look into dismantling and relocating the abandoned bridge for Radyr yard trains from Llandaf for this purpose to save money, providing it is still in usable condition.
- Once electrified, consider using light rail rather than heavy rail for City trains and build turnbacks at all City border stations so that light rail trains can turn around and head back into the City. Continue using heavy rail for all other traffic.

Not all bad news

I was overjoyed by two sets of news that broke this week, both of which are of great importance to Wales in transport terms, and one of which could potentially anger a few eco-terrorists.

The first of which was the announcement by the Transport Secretary that the Great Western Main Line from London Paddington to Swansea will be electrified, bringing electric trains to Wales for the first time in history. I was buoyed by this as electric trains are much better in every possible way than their diesel powered counterparts. They accelerate and brake faster because they are lighter and don't have to carry 8 tonnes of fuel, they provide a much smoother ride than all diesel trains (other than the InterCity trains), are cheaper to run and will in the long term hopefully lower rail fares. Not bad for a £1bn price tag if you ask me.

This will reduce the time from Cardiff to London by an estimated 30 minutes which will massively boost our capital's business credentials. I am also hoping that once the infrastructure is in place, which it should be by 2015-2016, that the Welsh Assembly Government should look to electrify the main rail routes in Wales, especially the Cardiff and Valleys Suburban Network, to capitalise on an already massively popular means of transport by applying all the advantages of the main line electrification.

The second piece of good news came in the shape of a Phoenix from the flames style reincarnation of the M4 Relief Road, which had initially angered a few vegetarians and was eventually shelved because of costs rising to three times the initial estimate.

However the new plan is to purchase a 3.5 mile private dual carriageway owned by Corus, previously used to transport heavy steel to Llanwern Metal Works. This would then be brought up to public highway standards and linked to Newport's southern bypass.

Not exactly the new three lane high capacity motorway that was needed to relieve the pressure of the Brynglas Tunnel bottleneck where the M4 is restricted to two lanes for less than half a mile, but it is a start, and could take 10% of the M4 traffic away from Brynglas.

And I didn't hear the vegetarians suggesting that during their protests outside the Senedd. Shame they never have any constructive suggestions for projects like this, other than "don't build it." Had they suggested this I would probably have a lot more respect for them.

What the EU actually does

With the European elections getting ever closer, a handful of political parties including UKIP and the BNP, both of which I fundamentally disagree with on every level, have called for the UK to pull out of the EU. The Party Political Broadcast for UKIP claimed that EU membership costs the UK taxpayer a whopping £40 million per day, but fails to mention any benefits which are gained from it. Of course, in their opinion, the answer is none, but I will now put forward some of the actual benefits.

The EU was created as the Western European Union (WEU) at the end of the Second World War to create a United Europe, similar to the concept of the failed League Of Nations proposed by US President Woodrow Wilson at the end of World War One. This was to safeguard against the event of nationalist domination from occuring again.

The role of the EU today is quite often to legislate on matters which are important, but in relation to things like Health, Defence and Education legislation, are relatively trivial. These laws being centralised in Brussels creates a standard pattern across Europe on things like Human Rights so that all EU countries operate under the same laws. The UK had to, for example, rescind the Death Penalty upon joining the EU. It also takes these relatively trivial matters away from national governments, which means that each government can concentrate on the important stuff.

So what are these "trivial" matters, and what exactly has the EU done recently?

First of all, when you go on holiday this year, you may notice that your mobile phone bills for calling back home are a hell of a lot lower. The recent advertising by vodafone suggests that they have done this "out of the kindness of their hearts" but the truth is that this has been forced upon them by EU legislation.

Another ruling affecting communications is the compulsory introduction of a universal phone charger (same adaptor, same voltage, etc) by 2012, meaning you would be able to use any charger to charge any phone. Think how much easier this will make charging up a phone! These are just two of many examples of how the EU is constantly working to improve the standard of our lives.

Of course, not all EU legislation is good. Today it was announced that the unpopular EU fishing legislation would be scrapped, but the point of the matter is that these bad decisions show exactly why voting in the European Parliament is important. Turnout in the UK for these elections is only 38%, and in my opinion, if you don't vote, you get idiots in office. Just look at UKIP.

So, in short, vote in the European Parliament elections. It really does matter.

Harnessing Mother Nature Part 2

This actually happened a while ago, but it was drowned by the news-worthiness of swine flu, MP's expenses and two reality TV star's marriage going down the shitpan. I've no idea who either.

Basically an investigation of several political entities including MPs, AMs and councillors from both sides of the Severn ruled that the Cardiff - Weston barrage was too expensive, too environmentally costly and would take too long to build to be of any good to the region. They also recommended that a smaller barrage be built near the Second Severn Crossing.

It was chosen as the best option as it would be best placed for a new rail link to replace the seriously dilapidated Severn Rail Tunnel, which needs to be abandoned as soon as possible. A feat of engineering brilliance in its time, but it is way too expensive to keep open and disruptive to rail services when Network Rail have to physically pump out water from an underground river flowing through it.

So hopefully this project will go ahead quite soon, and spearhead a boost of clean industry and transport for Wales and the West, which will be very handy considering there is now seemingly a cross party consensus on the role of clean, green industry in the next 30 years. 

The providing of both renewable energy and large volumes of fresh water from the Severn will make the region a perfect site for hydrogen fuel production, which as I mentioned in Part 1, would bring huge numbers of highly skilled jobs. The plant could even be built on the brownfield scar left by the demolition of Llanwern steelworks on the outskirts of Newport.

If this plant was successful enough, along with further projects in say, the Thames Estuary (possibly doubling up as a new Thames barrier), the Humber Estuary (largest volume displacement of tidal water in the UK) and Morecambe Bay (fastest tidal displacement), then the UK could secure clean energy independence and even export to the world, such as done with coal in the early 20th century.

Getting the decorators in

Due to the procrastination caused by exams, I have decided to redesign my blog. I hope you enjoy the new colours and layout.

As I finish for the year on Thursday of this week I'm sure some more posts will follow shortly.

Do not swallow this poisonous fascism

You may have seen their leaflets, you may have seen their political broadcast.

By all means read and watch what they have to say, we live in a nation where free speech is important. But for fuck's sake don't listen to it. The BNP are nothing more than a bunch of lying racists. And you thought MP's claiming expenses was bad.

The British National Party are pushing for several European Parliament seats, and with the ongoing expenses row and disillusionment in politics being at an all time high, they stand to gain from people not voting in the EU elections. They have even jumped on the moral bandwagon claiming that they are not like other politicians, "all with their heads in the trough", a phrase I'm sure they used because the the idiots thought it would anger Muslims. The fact is that the BNP could not claim a penny of expenses as they have no elected MP's. Although I'm certain they would be involved in this expenses scandal if they had just the one.

If the vast majority of the general public looked deeper than the leaflet and the broadcast, they would find a party of bigotry and hate. According to a UAF (Unite Against Fascism) leaflet,former GLA candidate Nick Eriksen (nice British name) is quoted to have said on the subject of rape, 

"Rape is simply sex. Women enjoy sex, so rape cannot be such a terrible physical ordeal. (It) is like suggesting force feeding a woman chocolate cake is a heinous offence."

And Mark Collett, leader of the young BNP (sounds like the Hitler youth, doesn't it?) said Channel 4 in 2004, on the subject of AIDS,

"AIDS is a friendly disease because blacks, drug users and gays have it."

The BNP is not just a threat to ethnic minorities, it is a threat to every single one of us. Everything which is great about Great Britain, ethnic diversity, freedom of speech and democracy, would disappear if they ever got into power. Just like Nazi Germany in 1933.

And on the subject of Nazi Germany, when Albert Einstein fled from there to Britain to avoid the Holocaust (which the BNP deny happening) he was quoted as saying:-

"The world is a dangerous place to live in, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."

Please remember, you have a vote on June 4th. Go to the polling station, and vote for any party you like. Labour, Tory, Lib Dem, Green, in the grander scheme of things it doesn't matter. Because one more vote for any of these mainstream parties, as different as they are, is a vote against the BNP. And the more people voting for mainstream parties, the less chance they have of winning any seats.

VOTE AGAINST THE BNP ON JUNE 4TH.

Stick it on my expenses Part 3

Oh dear, it seems like this will never end.

As Ian Hislop said on Have I Got News For You, "We've had 35 stories this week, where usually just the one would run all week, its like being punchdrunk!" But unfortunately, this story is no laughing matter, no matter what side of politicians you stand on.

First of all, on the anti-politics side, these stories can and do prove that not only are there politicians out there who have claimed for questionable things in their expenses, but that the system applied by the House of Commons basically allows them to do so. And on the pro-politics side, it goes to show how a handful of politicians not being completely moral with their expenses forms has put yet another nail in the coffin of trust for all of the other MP's.

Of course, this piece of investigative journalism, as much I will question elements of it, will prompt reform in the House of Commons, as public opinion of this country's democratic system depends on it, but the basic level of the claiming system is, in my opinion, perfectly rational.

MP's SHOULD be allowed to have a second home. MP's SHOULD be allowed to claim for furnishings in their second home. MP's SHOULD be allowed to claim for travel costs to Parliament. MP's SHOULD be allowed to claim for constituency running costs, including hire of an office and staff and communications, and purchase of postage and stationery. These expenses are here to aid politicians in what is a very difficult job - representing an electorate in Westminster and in a constituency which may be on the other side of the country.

Of course, some of the expenses claims in the news, naturally, have no basis in fact. So take them with a pinch of salt, but whether they are true or not, it does highlight the need for the rules need to be tightened up and made simple so that everyone, both the MP and the electorate, knows what is cushty and what isn't. Having a second home is fine, but it should be purchased and sold by the state and not the MP. Buying a bed for a second home is fine, but a four poster rare antique isn't. A freeview telly to watch Parliamentary sessions and news channels is fine, but a HD ready widescreen with Dolby Surround Sound isn't.

Stick it on my expenses Part 2

It seems that despite previous cries by my good self, those journalists are still turning the general public into opinionless bigots. So it seems I have to put forward my intelligence and knowledge once more to attempt to restore some sense to the current affairs sphere.

MP's are not selfish public servants who only seek to serve themselves. However, journalists are selfish private sphere elites who somehow manage to convince people that they live in the real world and care about Joe Public even though they earn nearly £1m a year from telling much bigger lies than any politician could ever erect into a web of lies.

The Daily Express ran with a front page this week claiming that some MP's claiming over £200,000 a year, without making any reference to the fact that nearly three-quarters of this is used for running the constituency office, with regard to hiring staff, stationery costs, communications and postage and the hire of the building itself. And as I previously mentioned, we can't stick MP's in a hotel, or expect them not to travel to the debating chamber to air our views. Of course, once it's in print, people believe the drivel that is in front of them.

Of course, this whole debate regarding MP's expenses was kick-started when the a Sunday newspaper (they keep the big stories until Sunday so that they make more money on the papers) did some investigative journalism regarding Jacqui Smith's expenses including two adult films, which were only worth £10 or so.

Of course, The Right Honourable Member for Redditch then had the gutter press calling for her head all week, something which even the leader of the Opposition spoke out against. Cameron said on the matter "It's very embarrassing but it is not as a resignation matter." Now, if a man who's job it is to hold the ruling party accountable for any mistakes they make leaves this one be, it shows you how trivial the matter is.

Besides, to me it is very clear what has happened. Ms Smith claims for a Virgin Media internet connection and phone line, something she is entitled to do, as it allows her to access her parliamentary and constituency emails, or recieve phone calls regarding these matters from home. As I use the same company as her, I know that with most net and phone packages the telly is thrown in at no extra cost, something which I use myself.

And with Ms Smith spending so much time away from home, being a very busy MP as I mentioned in my last post, the husband has taken the action he chose to. However, without the husband mentioning the matter of the films over the breakfast table, something I can't imagine him doing, then the film would have been paid for along with all the legitimate uses on the bill.

Of course this simple admin problem filled front pages and led the public debate for a week. And as much as I know that myh defence of Ms Smith is based almost entirely upon guesswork and conjecture, it's the same method used by the journalists writing these exclusive stories that I hate so much,

Be the best

There has been vast condemnation in the media this week of a small group of protestors who marred a homecoming ceremony for returning troops from conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Of course, usually a fifteen strong protest would never make the front page of a newspaper, but because all the people who protested were Islamic, the papers have whipped up another round of fury of "How dare they criticise our troops" and "If they don't like our ways they should go home." Some people are even calling for extremist protests to be banned.

Well, once again, because the press can't be trusted to deliver a rational, balanced argument to our ever misinformed general public, I guess it's down the bloggers to do so, and just hope someone reads our opinions.

I, personally, am very anti-military. I do not like any of the stigma attached to soldiers, especially the heroic stuff. There is no other profession where simply being employed in a certain position makes you a hero, not even the medical profession has this. I also do not like the fact that the Armed Forces seems to focus its recruitment on educational facilities, giving this image of it being a career path for anyone, forgetting to mention that you may have to kill people or end up being killed or wounded yourself, especially when other laws consider that people of sixteen are not mature enough to smoke or drink, but seemingly mature enough to decide a career in the Armed Forces.

But, as much as I am against all of these things, the one thing I do not consider it fair to do would be to personally attack the soldiers for this. I direct my disapproval at politicians and at the Ministry of Defence. Attacking soldiers would be as uneducated as not liking a policy of Tesco and shouting at the staff for it. But, unfortunately, these troops were targeted, as the press picked up fact that the protesters were Muslims and used this as the basis for reporting the story.

If I had a pound for every time I heard the words "If they don't like our way of life they should go home" on that day then I could probably have bought a fair amount of CD's. It is another almost daily example of media organisations cashing in on Islamophobia. Of course, I don't imagine the reaction of one individual, namely climbing on top of a supermarket and throwing packs of bacon at the protesters, either went down too well, or got categorically condemned.

As much as I disagree with protests of this nature, I may turn up at the next one just to see what spin the Daily Mail puts on it.

Stick it on my expenses

It seems that, once again, press are taking advantage of the general public's lack of knowledge of the internal workings of government.

The Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has been accused of acting selfishly by claiming £116,000 for her second home. Of course, this sounds like a abomination, a terrible way for a public servant to act. But, lets explore the facts. Personally, I am against Ms Smith's authoritarian policies in relation to counter terrorism, but I am quite happy to defend her on this case.

Jacqui Smith is the MP for Redditch, which is a small town near Worcester. She is also the Home Secretary and therefore a member of Gordon Brown's cabinet. So, her job requires her to divide her time equally between Redditch and the House of Commons, and Downing Street. A big ask if you ask me, considering I only go to University full time and work in a pub.

Now, if you work for a company and have to go to the other side of the country for a conference, or training, you have to have somewhere to live. Companies usually hire hotels for employees, but MP's can't really do this, as they carry sensitive documents which could be a breach of national security if say, the maid had a quick read when they come in to hoover the carpet. So they have to live in private accommodation. And, I don't know if you are aware, but London is a fucking expensive place. Most people struggle to pay a standard mortgage alongside the cost of a family on a wage of £30k. Try paying TWO mortgages, one of which is on a house in Central London, where most properties are worth at least £2m on £55k, the average wage for an MP.

Now, Ms Smith does not have a second home in London. As she spends most of her time in London, she lives with her sister and registers this address as her first home, meaning that her second home is the constituency home, where she has claimed the money, which is completely above board. So, what is the issue here?

There isn't one. The press just need a good story, especially one that makes MP's look like people who get overpaid to lie to us. Even though, as mentioned in my previous blog, the top journalist at the Daily Mail gets paid £700,000 a year. An MP couldn't claim more than a tenth of that.

But to fair, journalists tell many more porkies.

What a vile little man

Of course, I have become quite a critic of the way press operates in this country. I feel that they use their position of influence in a very misleading way. My favourite website, The Daily Mail Watch, documents front pages from the Mail and the Express and allows people to criticise them, academically or otherwise. When reading the comments left by others, the truth becomes so blindingly obvious.

But, away from the front pages of the Mail, a much darker force is at play. Yes, cue Mr Richard Littlejohn, the highest paid journalist at the Mail (between £700,000 and £800,000 according to Wikipedia) but still manages to convice Middle England that he is one of them, worrying about whether he can fill his car up or shop at Waitrose.

His attitude to asylum seekers and migrants is absolutely shocking. He is one of the bewildered journalists who make claims that asylum seekers live in the lap of luxury while good decent indigenous Brits struggle to make ends meet. Of course, this is absolute bollocks, but journalists never let something as silly as the truth get in the way of a good story. Despite the fact that this bare-faced lie has become the main issue of the BNP, Littlejohn, who has openly criticised them, keeps on writing, with incredibly outdated views on homosexuality, associating gays with paedophiles as though it was still 1955.

His style of debate is to make ridiculous claims then belittle anyone who attempts to academically disprove him with, oh, those silly unnecessary things we call facts. He is completely unaware and unkind of anyone who disagrees with him. This man is infecting the middle classes with an opinion that they are overlooked by New Labour and that people on council estates now earn more than they do in handouts.
"You couldn't make it up!" is his catchphrase. Although, actually, you can Richard, and I think it is fairly obvious that you have.

My pledge to Network Rail

Some good and bad news this week.

The Government have announced that it will be replacing the HST after 35 years of excellent service with the Hitachi Super Express (see above). These new trains replace the 125mph diesel trains and can accelerate and brake much faster, reducing journey times.

The bad news, is that due to the fact that Network Rail have not announced whether they will be undertaking a mass-electrification of the main lines, that the trains will be diesel or hybrid. Frankly, I believe this would be a massive waste of time and money. I'm not interested in the fact that some of the components will be built abroad, fueling the "British jobs for British workers" protesting. Sorry if it sounds a bit patronising, but people standing on a picket line don't look much like "workers" to me.

Of course, the announcement is an interim one and its very easy to make the trains fully electric when they haven't been built yet. So if Network Rail pushes through its feasibility studies then we can have an excellently clean energy rail network in a few years. So please, hurry up!

Another thing I would ask of Network Rail is to launch many more feasibility studies into reopening old stations. Congestion is at breakpoint in some cities now and the cheapest way of reducing it is by getting people onto the trains. There are a lot of areas at the edge of cities where industrial sidings used to be, especially in my home city of Cardiff, which are now brownfield strips, which are perfect for park-and-ride stations to keep cars away from the city centre.

We have the opportunity to make our cities more sustainable as we encourage public transport usage, and pushing through these projects will help to prop up the construction industry during it's most difficult period. It will also keep congestion down, so in my opinion, a win-win all around.

Harnessing Mother Nature

This week the shortlist for generating tidal power from the Severn Estuary was launched.

The scheme which seems to be generating the most interest is the Lavernock Point - Brean Down barrage, which if built, could generate 8GW of energy, or 5% of the UK's total energy demands. However Green groups have confusingly criticised the plans on ecological grounds and have called for a tidal lagoon scheme instead, but these would only generate 2-3GW.

However I think we need to support the Severn Barrage as best we can for many reasons. First of all, it will provide, clean, reliable and calculable energy to the region, being as tides occur twice daily where solar and wind power are not as reliable (you need a windy or sunny day respectively). There is also the added bonus that you can place a transport link on top of a barrage, and this would provide a road link to Somerset and Devon and a much needed replacement or alternative for the rapidly delapidating Severn Rail Tunnel.

Also, looking to the future, a lot of scientists are working on introducing hydrogen power in the UK when more research has been done, but the problem with this is you need energy to split the hydrogen out of water, and it has to be clean energy otherwise it misses the point of what hydrogen power is meant to achieve. If the barrage is built, we will have both a large amount of renewable energy and a huge amount of fresh water flowing from the Severn, which would provide a perfect base for hydrogen production companies, allowing high-skilled jobs to flourish in the area.

And then either South Wales or Somerset would be the epicentre of the new energy revolution, much like South Wales was in the Industrial Revolution.

A blessing in disguise?

There's been a lot of press about the BBC's decision not to show a Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) appeal for humanitarian aid in Gaza this week. A lot of celebrities and politicians have now urged the BBC and now Sky, who have also refused to show the appeal, to reconsider its position.

Although I do not feel the BBC has good grounds not to show the appeal in fear of waiving its impartiality, which is not relevant as it is a humanitarian appeal, not a Hamas funding appeal, but given the mass coverage it has been given, I believe this decision has given much more coverage to a very good cause than if it were given the all-clear by the BBC.

As a nation I believe we are unfortunately very wary of giving money to charities unless it is for one of the big telethons that the BBC does yearly, such as Children in Need or Sport Relief. Basically, if it isn't Terry Wogan or Lenny Henry asking, we don't care. Plus, we don't tend as a country to pay much attention to what is going on around the world politically, which is ironic considering that most of the political instabilities worldwide have been caused indirectly by our colonial history, Israel/Gaza being one of our many famous cock-ups.

And given the criticism being piled on the BBC lately, I've been quick to defend it for all it's worth. But on this occasion, please criticise the BBC as much as you like. Because the more public outcry we get, the more likely people are to realise what's going on and donate. And maybe our public will learn how fucked up the world is because of "Great" Britain.

And there clearly isn't enough education about the consequences of our actions here, because while innocent people are dying because of a 'state' and a militant organisation who disagree over some land, we are moaning about the state of the weather we are getting, paying council tax and the fact that some people can't afford to shop in M & S anymore.

Please, wake up Britain. Wake up and take a look at what's going on overseas. And give the DEC twenty quid while you're at it.

What I have planned for 2009

As the old tradition goes, the New Year is a chance for a new start for anyone who wishes for one. With all the highs and lows I had in 2008, a real rollercoaster ride, I really want 2009 to stand out as one of the best years of my life. So here are my plans for the year, basically some watered-down New Years Resolutions.

• Give up alcohol. I've been thinking about knocking it on the head for a long time, and recently I haven't had much of a taste for it, so I'm gonna see if I can keep away from it for some time. I've done some pretty awful and questionable things under the influence of booze, and it's really burning a hole in my pocket.

• Get fit and stay fit. Ever since my bike got nicked, my health levels have gotten terrible. Plus I really enjoy cycling and want to get back into it. I am going to buy a brand new bike, and once I am back to full fitness, I am thinking of doing a charity run involving my bike.
  

• Put 100% into Uni. Getting to Uni was my best achievement of 2008. Put I still don't feel I'm putting in all I have. I know it's only the first year but considering I'll be in a five figure deficit come graduation I'm gonna bloody make sure I make the most of it with a first!

• Chill out a bit. A lot of people say I overthink about things, and they are right. So from now on I'm gonna chill out a bit more and concentrate more on enjoying life as it comes rather than trying to make sure everything works the way I want it to.
  

In defence of the BBC

Is the BBC dead and buried? I for one certainly hope not.

But with 50, 000 complaints for the Ross/Brand furore, 20,000 over John Sargeant leaving Strictly Come Dancing, leading to debate over whether it is fair for people to pay the licence fee. As much as it is obvious that these debates have been whipped up by anti-public funding right wing media, I'm not going to criticise them for it because apparently, I do it WAY too much. So instead, I'm going to praise the good old Beeb. After all, I am one of the many people up and down this country who pays the TV licence which funds the BBC, so my opinion is as valid as anyone elses.

First of all, to those who criticise the fact that Johnathan Ross get's paid however much he gets paid, it doesn't matter anyway. He gets paid that amount because he pulls in viewers, and if he didn't get the amount he does, ITV would pay it to him with a click of a finger and bye bye go 8m Friday night viewers off to ITV1.

To those who claim that Ross's wages are a "complete waste of my licence fee", might I remind you that the BBC IS NOT A PERSONAL SERVICE TO YOUR OH-SO-GOOD-SELF. It is a publicly-funded service, therefore must serve the public. Every radio, television programme and sporting event that is on the BBC is there because people watch them. If a series of a drama, comedy or documentary didn't get any viewers, only then would it be a waste of the licence fee, and it would definitely not get a second series.

I for one, hate Strictly Come Dancing. But 10 million British citizens do not. So although Strictly Come Dancing is a waste of MY licence fee, it is not a waste for those 10m people who like watching it. I get more than my monies worth from programmes such as Doctor Who, Top Gear and Ashes to Ashes, from the watching of BBC News and BBC Parliament for current affairs and the usually DAILY usage of the BBC News and Sport websites. So basically, you only have the right to complain about TV licence payments if you DO NOT WATCH/LISTEN OR READ BBC MATERIAL AT ALL, and I think you'll find that hardly anyone who has a television or radio can hold this status.

And even then, the BBC's influence worldwide is massively important, to the point where it's impartial and unbiased as possible news coverage website was banned in China until recently because the authoritarian government were worried about it's citizens using its services to find out what was really going on inside the country in regard to its human rights abuse. The BBC also has a massive influence in the USA where the country's media is allegedly more biased towards the right wing than ours, and the exported channel BBC World finances even more quality broadcasting for our good selves.

So, in short, leave the BBC alone. We are very privileged to have such a service. And if any of these services collapse under this licence fee malarkey, then, as I am not violent enough to want to smash the editor of a particular newspaper's head in, I will definitely be writing a very strong letter to another more liberal newspaper about the whole thing.

BigotBook

I recently came across several Facebook groups which, to say the least, concerned me deeply.

One of these groups was called "Hang the bastards who did this to a WW2 veteran" , which includes a picture of said veteran and his facial injuries received during a burglary in his home. In the group many people have responded in a similar way to the groups title. I cannot stand anyone who expresses their opinions in this bigoted way, calling for violence against a fellow human being, even if the ones in question have committed an act of violence themselves.

This isn't the only one though. Groups of similar bigotry exist over the "Baby P" story and many other issues. And the groups have worryingly large numbers. Quite literally, we have a virtual "angry mob" conspiring online, and I'll be honest, I'm incredibly worried that we will have a similar problem from when the Sun ran their "name and shame" campaign in 2000 over convicted paedophiles, in which a paediatrican had her house firebombed.

However, when I saw that one of the groups, namely the veteran one, was advertising an event named a "March for decency in society", I burst into hysterical laughter, realising exactly what is going on. These people, who want to bring back the hangman, are calling for a decent society! Just a thought, but this "Utopia" of yours seems a bit too authoritarian for my liking.

The terrific irony in this is that I know people who want to bring back the death penalty in this country, one of these people said that they would "quite gladly do it themselves, and go and have a drink to celebrate afterwards". On another occasion, the same person told me that "this country has gone to the dogs."

Well, if we've got a society that would gladly murder another citizen and not feel any remorse over it, then on that ONE ISSUE ALONE, I would have to agree.

Got to love it!

I must say, this is one of the most brilliant things I have ever seen. It doesn't come close to Banksy's highly political graffiti, but still, for a proper advert, it's brilliant.

If enough money is raised by January, this message will be on London Buses for four weeks. The charity behind it is only about 10% away from securing the funding for this brilliant scheme.

The posters are the brain of the British Humanist Association and have the backing of, love him or loathe him, Professor Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins said on the matter, "Religion is accustomed to getting a free ride - automatic tax breaks, unearned respect and the right not to be offended, the right to brainwash children. Even on the buses, nobody thinks twice when they see a religious slogan plastered across the side. This campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think - and thinking is anathema to religion."

The pressure group Christian Voice re-acted in the best possible way to this, by being completely hypocritical.

Spokesperson Stephen Green said, "Bendy-buses, like atheism, are a danger to the public at large" and suggested "People don't like being preached at."

Well, Mr Green, as much as I am a peaceful man and have no issues with people believing in a God, or any other religion for that matter, I really think you need to repeat that last line to some of your fellow believers!

Everytime I go to a city centre, there are people with mega-phones shouting about how we are all doomed to damnation. I agree, but about global warming rather than judgement day. One poor guy sheepishly said to me, "We just love Jesus and want to share him with you."

I replied "Good plan. I tried that with my girlfriend. She dumped me." He didn't reply.

Time for some nationalisation

Although there are signs today that the bleak financial climate may be on the way back up, we have been living in some difficult times of late. People worried about redundancies are cutting back, firms are tightening their belts and laying off staff, and energy companies have raised their prices.

Woah, hold it there. Think about this logically. Where people in an uncertain climate are cutting back, energy companies start to introduce price hikes! After all, everyone needs energy, whether it be electricity, petrol or gas.

Many of the energy firms in the UK have raised their prices by about 40%, claiming that the prices they pay for the energy they supply us have risen. But there is evidence to suggest that the levies have not changed. It's only a theory, but is it possible that in a financially uncertain time, the big bosses at places like Npower and British Gas and their ilk have put the prices up knowing that people will have to use energy, therefore maximising profit while everyone else is cutting back?

After all, this is how business works. You provide a service, to earn maximum profit whilst keeping costs as low as possible. I'm not exactly someone who thinks profit is a dirty word, but when the poor and elderly may not be able to pay their heating bills this winter, I think it shows how heartless these companies are.

It never used to be like this. The socialist government of Clement Attlee in 1945 nationalised the energy companies, leaving them under government control, something which remained the case until 1986, when my least favourite politician Maggie Thatcher sold them off to the private sector.

So, I plea to the government of Gordon Brown to renationalise this industry, and turn it back into a service, rather than a cash cow. You had the money to pour £80bn into saving some greedy banks, so why not splash out on some good old socialist nationalisation? And while you're at it, please also consider the railways, the bus services, the haulage industry, the water boards, and anything else which is a required commodity to uphold the standard of living in this country, because I really don't think it's fair that we should be overcharged on the things in life that we need.

Let the police go snap-happy

Speed cameras. One of the most hated symbols of police presence on our roads. But are they really that bad? I think not.

They raise extra revenue for our police forces and have the potential to reduce council tax and government funding if they are used effectively. But unfortunately, they are not.

The police have taken to posting their locations online and on satellite navigational systems, painting them flourescent colours so they can be seen from a mile off, and putting signs up warning motorists that they are round the corner, all due to pressure from pro-motorist groups.

All unneccessary.

Why on earth do the police have to listen to, never mind carry out, the demands of pressure groups. The police are, after all, THE POLICE. They are there to catch people who commit crimes by whichever means they see fit, other than things such as entrapment.

There was a time when speed cameras were hidden, but the pressure groups moaned that people didn't know the cameras were there and it was unfair to hide them. That is about as ridiculous as being fined for urinating in public and appealing it because you didn't see the rozzer on the beat on the other side of the road.

So, this is what should be done.

• Make the location of traffic enforcement equipment (traffic signal cameras, speed cameras, radar vans, police checkpoints) exempt from the public domain, or the Freedom of Information Act, or classify them, or whatever. Just stop people being allowed to know where they are.
• Hide the buggers. Speed cameras only make people drive within the limit where the cameras are. If no sod either knows where they are, or can see them, I imagine speeding motorists would disappear overnight.
• No more £60 fines, lets try £500 fines, with compound interest of 10% and then see how much speeding falls. If it hits people hard in the pocket they will think twice about putting their foot down.
• No more silly rules like you cant catch them from the front in case it the flash blinds the driver. If they weren't speeding then they would be fine.
  
• Charge Mr Loophole, the bloke who gets celebrities off paying fines, with perversion of justice, and see how he widdles his way out of that.
  

This may seem a bit right wing, making laws and such, but in my opinion its about providing people with a choice. It's not like I want all cars limited automatically to the speed limit, so people have no freedom to break the law. Just let people drive as fast as they want, as long as they are aware what consequences are if and when they are caught at it.

In defense of "The Railway Two"

Although I completely disagree with the actions of the two people who pushed a woman off a train platform in Kent recently, I can completely understand why they did it.

I told this to someone in speech the other day and it didnt come across well, so I'm going to try again in written form and see how it comes out.

I have looked at the entire story and this is how I view it.

• The station is NOT covered, so although smoking on a train platform IS illegal, the two men may have been confused by the woman harassing them about doing so, as they were outside. A common misconception of the smoking ban is that smoking indoors is illegal and outdoors is not. What the two men were doing by smoking in a crowded station, in my view is the same as smoking in a busy street, which is perfectly legal.
  

• The woman is not an enforcer of the law, such as a police officer or a station attendant, so I don't really know what right she has to deliver the law to other members of the public. I am aware that you cannot smoke on a train station but I would not confront people who were doing so because it is a trivial law.
  

• Although they should not have pushed her onto the tracks, I can imagine they did not do so because she asked them politely. She most likely shouted at them repeatedly, bombarding them with stereotypes she read in the Mail, and they probably pushed her away, unwillingly in the direction of the tracks.

(I know the last point was a guess considering I was not there, but being as the newspapers have assumed that they were two useless teenage yobs/thugs with no respect for society, then I think I'm allowed to make assumptions too.)

I am constantly shouted at by middle aged women for all sorts of trivial things, like cycling on pavements to avoid busy junctions or not holding doors open because I am unaware someone is following me.

Recently I was getting onto a train at Cardiff Central after some commuters had disembarked. Seeing no further disembarkees, I boarded with my heavy suitcase so I could get it on the rack and out of the way of the people behind me. Unknown to me, a middle aged woman was struggling towards the door, completely out of my sight. Even though I moved back to let her out, she still shouted at me for "being selfish and having no respect".

I felt like hurling some abuse of my own. However I know that if I did, I would be as much in the wrong as she was to accuse me of being rude. So I held back. But not everyone can rationalise a decision like that quickly enough not to retaliate.

If the incident on the train platform was in any way similar to my experience, it's no wonder the woman got pushed off the platform.

I feel sorry for both parties. I understand the woman could have died under different circumstances and is understandly shocked by what happened, but given what has happened to me in the past, "lording it over" the two men was probably the reason they retaliated. But, they have committed a crime, and if found guilty should be punished accordingly.

Source to back up my argument:-

TimesOnline -

On Monday and Tuesday mornings, when they were smoking on the platform, she reminded them that they were not allowed to and asked them to stop. Smoking is prohibited on all railway platforms in England under the ban introduced last April.

The men made obscene gestures as she walked past them shortly after 7am, a police source told The Times. “She turned round and told them to grow up, and they pushed her. She stumbled backwards and fell on to the track. We don’t think they meant to push her on there. They were as surprised as she was.

The man who said "no"

This is a story I found in Banksy's book-come-portfolio "Wall and Piece". I read the story and was inspired by the one man who stood up to something which he believed wasn't right and changed history for the better. I think it deserves sharing.

The corrupt and brutal regime of President Ceausescu of Romania was infamous across the world. His ferocious government had run the country empathatically for many years, crushing any signs of dissent ruthlessly. In November 1989 he was re-elected President for another five years as his supporters at Party Conference gave him forty standing ovations.

On December 21st the President, disturbed by a small uprising in the Western city of Timisoara in support of Protestant Clergyman, was persuaded to address a public rally in Bucharest.

One solitary man in the crowd, Nica Leon, sick to death with Ceausescu and the dreadful circumstances he created for everyone started shouting in favour of the revolutionaries in Timisoara. The crowd around him, obedient to the last, thought that when he shouted "Long live Timisoara!" it was some new political slogan.

They started chanting it too. It was only when he called "Down with Ceausescu!" that they realised something wasn't right. Terrified, they tried to force themselves away from him, dropping the banners they had been carrying. In the crush the wooden batons on which the banners were held began to snap underfoot and women started screaming. The ensuing panic sounded like booing.

The unthinkable was happening. Ceausescu stood there on his balcony, ludicrously frozen in uncertainty, his mouth opening and shutting. Even the official camera shook with fright. Then the head of security walked swiftly towards him and whispered "They're getting in".

It was clearly audible on the open microphone and was broadcast over the whole country on live national radio.

This was the start of the revolution. Within a week Ceausescu was dead.

Why twenty-four hour drinking hasn't worked

Another battle lost in the war against binge drinking. Our town centres are still manned by so many police that it feels like I'm at home watching The Bill.

Twenty-four hour drinking was designed to make town centres safer, and in theory, it would have worked. Instead of everywhere closing at say, 2am, and everyone being on the street at the same time, some places would close later or earlier than each other and therefore less people would be about, and if any fighting did break out, then the police would be more able to deal with it.

The problem was not that though. The problem is that the young people of this country have been brought up in a culture that says it is OK to be absolutely smashed off your face in public. With that mentality, people are going to get injured because alcohol makes people feel invincible, and makes them do stupid things.

And that is why twenty-four hour drinking hasn't worked. And it's not twenty-four hour drinking anyway, it's a relaxation of licensing laws. Another Daily Mail-esque sensationalist term which is on the tongue of the nation.

If you go to a pub and see not my generation, or the generation after that, but the generation after that, you will see them endlessly drinking pint after pint after pint, but never getting drunk. It must therefore be possible to enjoy booze without trying to have a fight. Somewhere in the last generation the idea obviously got lost somewhere, or the responsible drinking lesson wasn't good enough.

So what should be done?

Well, first of all, this generation's obsession with alcohol fuelled violence has to stop straight away. Clubs should be stopped from doing any sort of drink deals, such as free shots with a flyer or buy one get one free. If people have to pay set amounts for each round rather than getting free drinks just for buying drinks in the first place or simply going to the club, they won't drink as much.

The next step is education about excessive drinking, making sure that young people don't get drawn into the bingeing culture. It may be too late for my peers, but hopefully this means that the next generation don't follow us into the shit-hole.

A onetrack mind

With everyone STILL blabbing on about the leader of the opposition cycling past a red light, I thought that I would give my opinions on the matter.

The first thing that I would like to talk about is this belief that the general public seem to hold about the difference between the way they behave and the way they expect people in the public eye to behave, and the difference in the way they react if they see a famous person break the law in comparison to Joe Public.

Driving whilst using a mobile phone for example, is against the law, and many people do it every day. Now, I have seen many people driving with a mobile phone, but I do not feel the need to photograph them and send the pictures to the police. And I think it's fair to say that I would be no more likely to do that if, say, Jeremy Clarkson happened to be the person involved. And, if I can safely say that I would be no more likely to send the picture to the police, then I would certainly not send the picture to the Daily Mirror.

In regards to Mr Cameron's "Red-Light-Gate incident" (the -gate phrase has become my Mr. Hyde trigger), there are many of us who would have to hold our hands up to jumping a red light (in a motor vehicle). If you jump a red light in a car, going at 30mph, you will most likely hit something and cause death or serious injury to both yourself and whatever you hit coming across your path. On a bike, however, it's a different matter.

On a bike, you are outside. You can hear cars coming. You are higher up, and you have no blind spots. You have much more interaction with your surroundings. You are also travelling at a much slower speed, and in charge of a much lighter vehicle, so can stop much faster if you suddenly need to.

I don't even think he was wrong to jump the light. In true reality all he probably did was went further than the white line so he had a headstart on the traffic (something which I believe is recommended in the Highway Code), but if he did venture into the middle of a crossroads in central London he was hardly going to hurt anyone other than himself. And knowing my own experience of being a cyclist, you have to be a right idiot to put yourself in danger on the roads, something which Mr Cameron is not.

In this world where we have to be very aware of our carbon productions, people like Mr Cameron should be praised for at least attempting to profile alternatives to the car. I doubt he has my vote for number 10, but that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve backing on this issue from a fellow cyclist.

The last stand of the unimiginative

Moaning is such a strangely annoying but popular thing to do. It makes the moaner feel better about themselves without actually solving the problem which is being moaned about. Humans have so much initiative and thought to give the world but on some people, it is totally wasted.

But the thing that really gets to me, is people who moan about things which they, or no person who has ever lived, is able to do anything about. And that old moaning topic is the weather.

First of all, when people try to talk to me about the weather, in my mind I rip out another block of my ever decreasing sanity. You can't have an intelligent discussion about weather, because the facts are sitting up in the sky for all to see. If someone says to me "Horrible out, isn't it?" I feel like answering back in an incredibly sarcastic manner, "Is it? I hadn't noticed!"

As Oscar Wilde once said, "Conversation about the weather is the last stand of the unimaginative", and his comments are relevant to this day. What does the Daily Mail or the Daily Express do when it has no migration stories to put racist spin on? Or when it's short on made up stories about some council somewhere banning something traditional "in case it offends Muslims", in the hope that we believe their first class bullshit and become a nation of Islamophobes? Or when they've run out of things to say about Princess Diana or Madeleine McCann? Or when there's no new scientific evidence that something as innocent as broccoli might give you leukemia? It moans about the weather.

The other trouble is, with Brits uniquely, is that good weather is not always sunny weather, just the weather that they want on that day. In the bleak of winter they will moan on a clear day if it gets a bit nippy, but if some rainclouds come along to keep the heat on the ground, they moan about the rain. And in the summer, when we get a nice cooling breeze, it's too cold. If we don't get one, it's too hot.

In the Daniel Powter song "Bad Day" he laments on the state of mind of people who are never happy with their lives. And the line "You'd need a blue sky all the day" rings so fucking well true.

Life is what you make it people. We only have so long on this planet before we face the certainty of death. Stop wasting your life moaning about things that you have no power to change. If you are that bothered about what the weather will do tomorrow, watch the forecast, and plan your day accordingly.

And whatever you do, don't moan at them when they get it wrong.

What I would do if I won the lottery

It's one of those personality inquisitive questions, isn't it? The kind of question you get asked by someone who doesn't know you that well, but wishes they did.

Everyone has their own designs on what it would be like to win the jackpot. Usually its, "I'd pay off my mortgage, take my friends on holiday, buy a private jet, etc etc etc" and all that.

We all hear stories of people winning the lottery, some who disappear back into society, and others who stay in the limelight for the wrong reasons such as Michael Carroll, the man who became labelled in the media as "King Of Chavs" due to his controversial lifestyle whilst living on rags and riches respectively.

Anyway, it was brought up in conversation a few days ago, and after some careful thought I decided what I would do in the impossible event of me winning the lottery (because I don't play).

First of all, I would lock it into a savings account of which I had no access to for a whole year. This way I could spend time thinking about exactly what I would do with such a ridiculously large amount of money. Afer that year, if I still had not decided, I would lock it in for another year, and so on. But how hard can it be to decide how to spend seven figure sums of money, you may ask? Well, as it turns out, very. Because this money would most certainly not stay in my hands.

Money corrupts the mind.

It's well known. It changes your personality, your opinions of others, and their opinions of you. However, someone who has phenomenal amounts of money which they would not wish to spend, or keep can do some wonderful things.

The lot would go to charities and good causes. The reason I would keep it locked away for so long is that it would be very difficult choosing which charities to donate the winnings to.

How is this drivel allowed?

It's disgusting. Every single day racist, right-wing propaganda is fed into the brains of the people of the nation who believe everything they read. Which is, unfortunately, judging on the sales of the newspaper The Daily Mail, a sizeable chunk of the population.

As I used to work in a newsagents, I used to be able to have a flick-through while it was quiet, to see what crap they were feeding into our heads on any particular day. But as I am currently unemployed, to continue my pledge against this excuse for a newspaper, I'd have to buy it and therefore support it. Therefore my current crusade based only on the front pages, anything I can remember from a quick read before the shopkeeper politely asks me to leave, or from www.mail-watch.co.uk if I havent had a chance to see it on any particular day.

I challenge anybody with half a brain cell to look at the usually racist, directly or indirectly, whether it be some far-fetched estimate about illegal immigrants costing £150 gazillion quid a day to some council somewhere deciding that you can't put pork in the bin because it might upset a Muslim (which I very much doubt), and see what kind of hatred can build up in the mind of someone who (to be kind, or PC) is not-all-there.

Surely there must be some law against inciting racial hatred in the media, being as we live in a supposedly civilised nation that frowns upon such a practice, and rightly so. And if there isn't, well, I quote the average Daily Mail reader:-

"This country has gone to the dogs."

Unfortunately, the Mail is not alone. Other papers such as the Express seemingly attempt the same approach, and other newspapers are biased towards their target audience's political opinion or general views.

So, if everyone's changing the news so it fits what they want the world to think, then who DO you believe?

The BBC.

(But, apparently, even they are not 100% unbiased, as somebody told me, as the Tories plan to cut their funding, they are very-slightly pro-Labour, but I've seen no evidence of this myself.)

Example:-

Excuse me for picking a story from the Sports pages, but last week Reading FC's Dave Kitson said:-

"We are not going to win the FA Cup and I do not care less about it, to be honest. I care about staying in the Premier League, as does everybody at this club. Our league status is not protected by winning the FA Cup - simple as that." (Source - BBC Sport, Wed 2 Jan 2008)

By the weekend, the story had "matured" into the 27-year old saying that he "did not give two shits" (Various sources) and the whole thing had erupted into a fierce debate along the lines of "How dare he slam our football heritage" and all that bull.

We live in the Information Age, or so they call it. In reality, we live in an age where changing a word here and there in the press can change history.

And one afterthought, have you EVER met an intelligent racist? I haven't.

An anger "fuelled" entry for those moaning about fuel

Once again, the country is throwing up its arms about fuel prices. Fuel, in case you've been trapped in a sewer, has seen its price increase to over £1 a litre in recent weeks. Everyones talking about it. It's all over Facebook, and even Top Gear has had it's say. Now, its my turn.

Now, unless you're the owner of a transport, haulage or vehicle based company, I can't honestly see what all the fuss is about. I myself have owned a car, suffice to say the average I paid was about 91-93p a litre. I owned a relatively small car, with a 30 litre tank, which, if driven carefully, I could cover 240 miles on, which is about 35-37 mpg. This cost me on average about £28. At £1.05 a litre this would cost me £32. Big wow! Four quid a tank! Thats hardly breaking the bank as far as the public are concerned.

Then, we have another factor to throw into the mix. Whenever I drove, I could have easily walked, cycled, or at a desperate last resort, waited an hour for the bus. In fact I would go as far to say that 90% of all my journeys in the car were unneccesary.

Now I don't have a car, I cycle whenever I need to go somewhere.

Bikes really are great. They don't have roofs or doors, but these can be subsitituted by waterproof clothes. They don't need cooling fans, because you are outside. They have three times more gears than a car to compensate for the tiny half a horsepower generated by human legs, which if strong enough and using the correct gear, can get to 30mph on the flat. Which is much faster than a car in a traffic jam, or a bus for that matter. And although they don't have a boot, this can be replaced by something called a rucksack, which you put on your back.

Another great thing is that they run on glucose and oxygen. Oxygen is freely available to all, and glucose is found in all good bookshops, erm, foodstuffs rather. The two create energy, carbon dioxide and water in a process called respiration, although the amount of carbon dioxide produced is minscule compared to internal combustion.

Also, unlike a car, cycling keeps you fit and healthy, and is good stress relief, as you can pull people's wing mirrors off if they cut you up.

Tesla? What a load of old buzz

If anybody pays attention to the motoring pages of Sunday papers, then you will probably know that there is a new electric car available to buy soon. Now, in my opinion, electric cars have always been shit.

Not because of the concept of them, but because no car company wants you to buy them because they are probably paid big bucks by the oil companies for not making them, or making shit versions thereof. So none of the big manufacturers are going to produce them, or are going to make something like the G-Whizz, which is certainly not what I said when I saw it. As the one I saw was green, it reminded me of a wrinkly dried pea. Which is not a strong selling point if you ask me.

Anyway, this however, doesn't stop private companies from building electric cars, such as Tesla. No, I've never heard of them either, except in Physics lessons. But they have built an electric car which sounds brilliant on first reading. It will go an amazing (for a lecky car) 250 miles on one charge. But theres a catch.

This is where the oil bung has come in, as it is ... wait for it ... designed with the performance and looks in mind of a Ferrari. It goes from 0-60 in 3.5 seconds and will reach near enough to 150mph (I think, can't be bothered to Wikipedia it). And it only costs circa ... £60,000.

Now, I don't know if you've ever met an environmental nutjob, but I don't imagine them to be particularly rich, especially not rich enough to buy a sports car, internal combustion powered or otherwise. In fact, I would go so far to say that anyone with that amount of money does not give two shits about the environment. So nobody is going to buy it. Those who want to be green can't afford it, and those who can afford it don't want to be green.

Further evidence of oil bribery exists in the fact that nobody has thought about the possibility of building small electric cars based on old time favourites. Wouldn't you just love an electric version of the original Mini (Not the new one, it's shit), or the Morris Minor? Or VW buses?

Hippies love these cars because it reminds them of when the world was a cooler place (in temperature and rad-ness sense) and everyone was worried about dying from nuclear war rather than Mother Nature turning up the thermostat. The fact is that the oil bigwigs want us all to die, but we can live safe in the knowledge that they'll be taking their trillions with them.

Idiots.

Almost a month without a car and I aint bothered yet

Well, I said I'd tell you how I got on, so here goes.

So far, being carless has saved me about £200, pissed off 9 chavs, and made my resting heart rate drop 2bpm.

The expense of running a car is something that doesn't really occur to you until actually have the money in the bank that you wouldn't have had if you were running one. I used to top-up with fuel ever one or two weeks and I would fill the tank (about £30 at current pump prices) . Thats £60. Insurance was roughly about £1000 a year, which would have been a lot higher if I hadnt found a really good company, due to my age and possession of a penis, which makes me a dangerous road user. Tax was £120 a year, and any repairs I had to make or MOT costs (I was about to have one done) are on top of that.

Also my carbon footprint has improved dramatically. I imagine now that I dont own a car the world will remain habitable for another 5 seconds or so before we all boil to death.

The great thing about cycling is of course, that you can jump red lights without the fear of the police stopping you (unless they actually see you of course), but its safer on a bike because you're a smaller target, and you can see more because you are higher up. Also, as no-one really wants to run over a cyclist, I can use their goodness of leaving a lot of room to bully other road users out of their lanes, something which is expensive to try in a car. You are also more visible to other road users, well, your middle finger is anyway, as you don't have to wind the window down to show your feelings.

My car had made me so lazy that I had not been on a bike for almost a year, and now I have returned to the saddle, I am getting pains in all moving parts. My knees, my arse (only when on the saddle thank God), and my lungs and heart have taken a battering. However, I feel fitter and happier already, so it can't be all bad.

I also have a Railcard now, so trips to other cities are possible. And you can't sleep while hammering down the M4 you know.

The bastardisation of Christmas

It happens every year, and it always gets to me. Even though I'm not religious in the slightest. Anyway, here goes.

Every September or so, companies start to advertise products that they will be selling in the run up to Christmas. It's usually on the basis of "Hey kids, we've got loads of shit to sell this Christmas that costs loads and breaks in two minutes, so go and punch your dad until he buys you the entire set!"

Or, "The nicest way to tell your girlfriend that she smells funny this winter is to buy her really expensive perfume that's been endorsed by the bloke who shaved off Britney Spears' hair, only find that it actually smells like rat's piss." I have no idea what they market to people looking to buy presents for their dads. Maybe thats why they always end up with socks and ties.

The point, anyway, because I'm waffling, is what, if anything, does this have to do with the birth of Christ other than some wise blokes bringing gold, frankincense and myrrh? Jack shit. The corporate bastards have found a tradition in Christianity and milked it like another unethical cash cow. If that happened in any other religion I imagine there would be uproar.

I think the point that I'm trying to make is that people have no concept of religion in Britain these days unless it's for their own personal benefit. They will quite gladly throw their other half out of the house for not getting the stuff they wanted, but will never actually celebrate the festival itself. And even though, as I have already said, I am not in the slightest bit religious, that sickens me.

Basically, if you don't believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God, then there is no reason why you should be in town buying shitloads of stuff for your friends and family this December. If you want to celebrate Christmas in the correct way, then go to church.

Thank you and goodnight.

Why climate change protesters have got it wrong

Climate change is one of the biggest topics spoken about and will be for some considerable time. Everyone says how big businesses are utterly responsible for the way in which our planet is being reaped for resources and poisoned with carbon dioxide. But, it isn't.

Its our fault. The general public. Us.

Car companies are only going to build four wheel drive sports utility vehicles if they know we will buy them. Airport expansions will only go ahead if too many people want to travel. It is not the attitudes of big business that has to change, it is the attitude of the people. They must stop buying large cars, stop flying to Spain, shun companies who don't respect the environment and support those who do.

And it's not hard either.

Why does anybody need a seven seat car with four wheel drive in a big city? Especially when only one person is in it? I know that the footprint of a vehicle is determined by the number of people in it, but I have never seen a full SUV. Just a driver and maybe one passenger. And, if you've got five kids, surely you need to think that you might be richer and happier if you'd stopped at two.

Short haul flights are ridiculous too. You can get from London to Newcastle by train you know. You see the countryside too, not just a bunch of clouds and dots on the landscape. But if people weren't so pompous and thought "I can afford to go to Thailand, so why shouldn't I?", then maybe we wouldn't be on a dying planet.

There is no need to drive a big car to look important when small cars are more practical, easier to drive in cities and better for your pocket.

There is no need to fly to New York for a meeting when you can videoconference for the cost of a microphone, a webcam and an internet connection. And I thought big businesses were all for cost cutting.

And, there is no need to holiday abroad when even the UK has some fantastic holiday spots. And when you think about it, theres nothing wrong with the bloody weather.

Crippling lack of car, or is it?

Last week, to my misery, my car's engine conked out.

I honestly think it will cripple me, being confined to public transport and walking. This is often the opinion of people who lose their cars, through financial problems or disqualification. However I have already worked out that being without a car saves me £150 a month, so it cant be a bad thing. And theres no way I'm gonna spend that much on transport fares, even if Cardiff Bus is extortionate and have machines that don't give change.

Another thing on my side is that I used to cycle. A lot. A long way. And fast, too. At one point I was hot on the heels of some of the fastest riders in the country. Then I got badly injured. But I can still ride a bike so that will become my primary transport.

I'll let you know how my new carless transport comes along.

Britain's stiff Northern Rock of an upper lip

As you may be aware due to the troubles in the US markets this week Northern Rock finance announced that it was lending money from the Bank Of England because its other cashflow had dried up due to the rate increases. Of course, this was met with mixed reaction but financial experts, notably within the BBC (the source I got my information from) said there was nothing to worry about because the company is still solvent and its assets would be very attractive to another building society should it need to be sold on.

But, instead of listening to the experts, the Great British public did what they do best (queue) outside Northern Rock branches all over the sodding country for hours so they can get their savings out before they disappear off the surface of the Earth. But why? Because the papers asked whether their money was safe and everybody panicked, like buying ten pints of milk and five loaves of bread each when an inch of snow falls and then complaining about shop shelves being empty.

It's a strange state of affairs this country. If the Daily Mail says that Northern Rock is going to go bust or that illegal immigrants are lowering house prices, Joe Public will believe it, but refuse to listen to experts on the matter, who will tell you that its all a load of bullshit.

That's like me asking both my mate down the pub and my doctor about a lump I found on my back, my doctor telling me its a build up of fluid which will subside soon, and my mate telling me its a malignant tumour, so I believe my lesser experienced chum and begin to plan the last six months of my life.

The other thing that really gets on my nerves about the press is the way that they openly slate our police forces so unneccessarily. Another story I noticed today, in my favourite publication the Daily Race Hate Mail, was that a police force had told a woman whos handbag had been nicked that it wasn't a crime. Shock horror, you might think, and "What's this country coming to?" etc etc, but read on and you'll find that the woman managed to snatch the bag back off the thief.

Now, if my drains are blocked, and I manage to unblock them, the last thing I want to do is phone a plumber. So why go and waste the police's time if you solved the problem yourself by taking the law into your own hands, which itself is a crime?

Yes, I do think the words "What's this country coming to?" but most certainly not about our government, police service and anyone else who was slated in the gutter press this week. I think it about the general public.

Why I hate the tabloids so much

A lot of things happened this week.

Scores of people were killed in Greece by raging forest fires which also left countless more homeless. Two enemy forces in Iraq have decided to stop fighting each other. North Korea has supposedly agreed to suspend its nuclear policy. Nine endangered gorillas were killed by rebels in Congo. But what do the papers want us to read and care about?

A man winning Big Brother, a woman who married Prince Charles and died in a car crash ten years ago, and a little girl lost who still hasn't been found.

Although the last story is every parent's worst nightmare and as much as I hope she is found safe and well, the media has gone into absolute overdrive with the story of Madeleine McCann, as well as Brian Belo's Big Brother victory and Diana's death which happened ten years ago.

The whole affair with Diana back in 1997 confused me somewhat that people were crying over someone they'd never even met, never mind knew well. I know Diana did a lot of humanitarian work in developing countries, mainly to do with the removal of landmines and the care of children caught in them, but there was somebody else who did an awful lot more for those less fortunate than ourselves, and coincidentally died the same week that Diana did. Do you know who it was? No, you don't because the media didn't care and still doesn't. And that person was Mother Theresa.

Who? Exactly.

Waste not, want not

Every time somebody goes shopping, they probably collect about 20 carrier bags for their shopping, even though at home they've got more carrier bags than a small convenience store in their kitchen. I think its time we started making an example of these idiots.

There is a petition online to introduce a 10p plastic bag tax which the government can use for environmental research. If you agree with this please sign the petition at this address.

Cheers!

The problem with cleaning

It is, quite clearly, the 21st century. We live in an age of technological wonder, consumer supply and demand and, most importantly, in this country at least, an age of sexual equality, or at least an age in which it is expected.

Women now have some of the most successful jobs in Britain, are said to work harder than men according to recent statistics, and the old barrier of "The man goes to work and the woman keeps the house clean and looks after the kids" is a thing of the past.

Or is it?

I don't honestly believe that it is. Although I am a very advanced technology user, I am able to use a computer and look after it as long as what I have to do doesn't involve any sort of programming (hey, give me time) and I understand what different people should look for if they want a telly or a DVD player. But give me an iron, or a washing machine, and my mind is a blank. But why?

Modern stereotypes consider that men have the upper hand when it comes to technology, mainly because they are interested in the purchase and understanding of the technical specification, and therefore can (apparently) boast to mates or co-workers that their MP3 or sat-nav system is better than theirs. The problem therefore, is that cleaning is just not manly enough, surely?

Bullshit. Cleaning and housework IS manly, but no man wants to admit it. A man will quite gladly clean his car, but ask him to clean his house and, oh no, thats a womans job. But if you look at it, cleaning something, ie using elbow grease, a cocktail of heavy duty chemicals, and a big bad arse vacuum cleaner, and whats more, getting it done in the quickest possible time so you can head off down the pub, is very manly.

But if a man wants his shirt to look the crispest shirt in the office, he'll probably still ask his wife, girlfriend or mother to do it. Strange that.

And, in all irony, this rant extends to myself, who, although trying to convince the world single handedly that cleaning isn't all feather dusters, aprons and marigolds, is currently sitting in a shit-tip of a bedroom.

Looks like mankind is doomed to depend on women to run this world after all.

Social networking: Is the boom over?

As an avid social networker, I think I've noticed a growing trend amongst the sites upon which they are based. And that is that from where I'm standing they appear to be drying up.

MySpace seems to have had the worst casualty rate. Now, although I have a sizeable number of friends, bulletins are rarely posted and nobody seems to leave comments for me anymore. None of them have disappeared from my friends list, so I can only assume that they've stopped logging in.

Other sites such as Bebo and Faceparty havent exactly had massive success either. Bebo has always had itself unwantingly self branded as a chav-dominated place and Faceparty is full of sex-mad freaks who don't want to spend money on genuine sex sites. Even university boffins are suggesting that the network site you use saying a lot about your status in society.

Facebook seems to be all the rage at the moment but with Mark Zuckerberg's college mates threatening envious lawsuits, this may be off the net altogether soon.

So there you have it. The great blip in the .com saga that was social networking. Possibly. I really hope not though. With Facebook and MySpace (even though its drying up where I'm standing) are still some of the most used websites in the world. On some university campuses in the UK Facebook accounts for 90% of network traffic.

Where will we all go if this boom flops?

Welcome to my new blog - and my first rant

This is my new blog, freshly moved from MySpace. Which is "so 2005". Anyone who wants to read previous entries from this link to it here.

In all honesty I hate how everything moves on so fast these days, When I was a teenager the electronic equipment that was "in" was a portable CD player (ideally one that didn't skip), and a Nokia 3310 mobile phone with a black and white screen and no WAP. And a custom case with wicked graphics that you got down the market. Although Google existed, hardly anybody used it. Nobody knew what an ASBO or a chav was. Social networking existed only within adding random people on MSN and hoping they were an attractive member of the opposite sex. And nobody was concerned about their "carbon footprint".

There are plenty of people in this world who lament about the "good old days", but the time I am referring to was only 5 years ago. It worries me to think that in 50 years time I'll be lamenting to my grandchildren about the .com era and they'll look at me really oddly when I utter the word "iPod". If we've come as far as we have in 5 years, where will the world go in the next 5?

Kind of scares me to be honest.