What a nice cosy relationship. I wonder if they also employ those that are fighting for lower energy bills.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255251/Gas-oil-giants-staff-government-payroll.html
Monday, 31 December 2012
EU debate continues
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9772371/Britain-should-be-offered-second-class-membership-of-the-EU.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/dec/31/eurozone-crisis-angela-merkel-2013-predictions
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-britain-could-be-given-secondclass-membership-of-bloc-8434233.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/forty-years-on-the-benefits-of-eu-membership-are-no-longer-compelling-8433996.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255217/EU-offer-second-class-membership-stop-Britain-leaving-altogether.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/dec/31/eurozone-crisis-angela-merkel-2013-predictions
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-britain-could-be-given-secondclass-membership-of-bloc-8434233.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/forty-years-on-the-benefits-of-eu-membership-are-no-longer-compelling-8433996.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255217/EU-offer-second-class-membership-stop-Britain-leaving-altogether.html
Big Brother and Police State to operate on peadophiles
May Our Lord Jesus show such people His unfailing mercy, because our state certainly is not.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255202/Paedophiles-tagged-GPS-alarms-triggered-near-school-playground.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255202/Paedophiles-tagged-GPS-alarms-triggered-near-school-playground.html
Daily Mail targets large families with unemployed parents
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255203/Benefit-broods-How-taxpayers-fork-150m-year-families-children.html
£150m a year seems quite small compared to the cost of bailing out banks and still paying them massive bonuses.
If companies really cared about this as a problem, they would cooperatively do something about it. But they are more interested in REDUCING how much corporate tax they pay.
So just as people who are entitled to benefits claim them, so do companies entitled to lower their corporate tax, do so.
Not sure where it says "if banks are at risk of going under, they are able to claim a huge benefit from the government".
£150m a year seems quite small compared to the cost of bailing out banks and still paying them massive bonuses.
If companies really cared about this as a problem, they would cooperatively do something about it. But they are more interested in REDUCING how much corporate tax they pay.
So just as people who are entitled to benefits claim them, so do companies entitled to lower their corporate tax, do so.
Not sure where it says "if banks are at risk of going under, they are able to claim a huge benefit from the government".
Independent New Language : "Equal" Marriage
For centuries we have clearly had unequal marriage.
The leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales calls on followers to oppose plans for equal marriage (my emphasis)
The leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales has urged followers to write to their representatives in Parliament to oppose the government's plans to allow gay marriage.
In a letter read to congregations over the weekend, Archbishop Vincent Nichols called for Catholics to express their views "clearly, calmly and forcefully."
Nichols says he is concerned about how a change in the law would affect what children are taught about marriage.
He says he wants members of Parliament to "defend, not change, the bond of man and woman in marriage as the essential element of the vision of the family."
Prime Minister David Cameron's Conservative-led government plans to introduce legislation in January to allow gay marriages. Recent opinion polls suggest a large majority of the public supports the change.
The leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales calls on followers to oppose plans for equal marriage (my emphasis)
The leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales has urged followers to write to their representatives in Parliament to oppose the government's plans to allow gay marriage.
In a letter read to congregations over the weekend, Archbishop Vincent Nichols called for Catholics to express their views "clearly, calmly and forcefully."
Nichols says he is concerned about how a change in the law would affect what children are taught about marriage.
He says he wants members of Parliament to "defend, not change, the bond of man and woman in marriage as the essential element of the vision of the family."
Prime Minister David Cameron's Conservative-led government plans to introduce legislation in January to allow gay marriages. Recent opinion polls suggest a large majority of the public supports the change.
A sign of the times?
Man critically ill after suspected Christmas 'trolley rage' incident at Marks
& Spencer store in Kent
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-critically-ill-after-suspected-christmas-trolley-rage-incident-at-marks--spencer-store-8434060.html
Two men arrested over brutal murder of organist killed in 'random attack' as he went to Midnight Mass
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254640/Alan-Greaves-murder-Two-men-arrested-attack-organist.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-critically-ill-after-suspected-christmas-trolley-rage-incident-at-marks--spencer-store-8434060.html
Two men arrested over brutal murder of organist killed in 'random attack' as he went to Midnight Mass
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254640/Alan-Greaves-murder-Two-men-arrested-attack-organist.html
Friday, 28 December 2012
A view of 2012 by the Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254394/2012-year-divide-people-powerful-dangerously-wide-The-tragedy-theres-proud-Britain-.html
Where will 2012 stand in history? It was not one of the outstanding, iconic years like 1945, the year World War II ended, or 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell.
It saw no earth-shattering events to stand beside the collapse of the Soviet Union, the terrorist attacks on New York or the invasion of Iraq. In many ways, indeed, the story of 2012 was simply more of the same. In Britain, the Coalition limped miserably along, while the economy stubbornly refused to improve.
On the Continent, the euro staggered blindly from crisis to crisis. In the Middle East, the festering sore of the Israel-Palestine conflict claimed the lives of hundreds more victims, while the Arab Spring slid further into bloodshed.
And across the Atlantic, Barack Obama won an unexpectedly comfortable re-election against a backdrop of bitter ideological wrangling, fiscal brinkmanship and the horrifying massacres in Colorado and Connecticut.
Here in Britain, most will remember it as the year of two glorious public celebrations: the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and the Olympics.
After months of bad news, the summer’s events were a chance to remind ourselves that in the cultural and sporting arenas at least, British creativity and inspiration still lead the world.
It was, as one American newspaper put it, a year with a pronounced British accent, from the box-office triumphs of James Bond and the adaptation of Oxford don J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit, to our cricketers’ splendid series victory in India and our rugby team’s thrashing of the supposedly unbeatable All Blacks.
And yet, if 2012 had a British accent, it was not one that Bond author Ian Fleming, or indeed Tolkien, would have recognised. Last month’s release of the latest census results showed how much our country had changed during the years of New Labour rule.
Tolkien, a deeply religious man shaped by the horrors he witnessed on the Somme, would be astonished to discover that barely six out of ten people now call themselves Christians.
And Fleming, steeped in the values of Empire and convinced the British had a right to rule the world, would have been astounded by the news that almost eight million people in England and Wales were born abroad, while in London, white British residents are now a minority.
To my mind, though, the real change since the days of Fleming and Tolkien has been deeper and more subtle. It is true that to modern eyes, their era often seems intolerant and censorious.
Yet they grew up in an age that took duty seriously, prized responsibility, shrank from self-indulgence and had a profound, almost transcendent faith in the great institutions of the British Establishment.
Perhaps it is just as well, then, that they were not around to see what happened in Britain in 2012.
For there is no getting away from the fact that, as far as the country’s political and cultural establishment were concerned, this was probably the single worst year in living memory.
Almost every week seemed to bring new revelations of arrogance and wrongdoing, from the petty pilfering of some MPs such as Denis MacShane — who even invented institutions and forged signatures to help himself to Parliamentary expenses — to the appalling allegations swirling around the squalid, shell-suited figure of the late Jimmy Savile.
There is a grim irony in the fact that while we are facing perhaps the most difficult political and economic decisions in a generation, politics itself has never been in deeper disrepute.
Indeed, the grotesque farce of the elections for local police commissioners — which were so badly publicised that one polling station in Wales recorded no votes at all — speaks volumes about the corrosion of popular interest in politics.
It is little wonder that many ordinary people feel they have no stake in the political process. At the top, they see an unhappy Coalition riven by childish bickering, opposed by a Labour Party that often seems to have lost all gumption, guts and soul.
They see one of our best-known backbench MPs, the outspoken Nadine Dorries, choosing to abandon her constituents for the tawdry attractions of I’m A Celebrity . . . Get Me Out of Here! — a decision that turned politics itself into a national laughing stock.
And when many voters picture their political representatives, they imagine characters like Denis MacShane, the expenses fiddler, or Andrew Mitchell, the short-lived Tory Chief Whip who was accused of referring to police officers as plebs.
Whether Mr Mitchell used the offending word, or whether, as now seems possible, he was framed, his alleged insult was the most resonant political remark of the year.
For me, the really revealing thing about it is simply that it sounds so plausible. Sadly, it is the kind of remark most of us can imagine our privileged political masters saying, even if only under their breath.
The truth is that our institutions have never felt more unaccountable, arrogant and out of touch than they did in 2012. And that, in turn, explains why, although history is littered with largely forgotten scandals, the Jimmy Savile affair will surely echo down the years.
It had already been a bad year for the BBC. Its disastrously frivolous coverage of the Jubilee river pageant was widely regarded as one of the lowest points in its recent history, even attracting fierce criticism from the corporation’s own star performers.
But the Savile scandal was in a different league. At the very least, it suggested that for decades the BBC had been harbouring a malignant child abuser whom it then shrank from exposing because, if some accounts are to be believed, Newsnight’s revelations clashed with BBC1’s plans for a tribute to the ghastly Savile.
What was worse was that the BBC, as though punch-drunk from the inevitable storm of criticism, then contrived to smear a completely innocent man, Lord McAlpine, as a child abuser himself — a calamitous error of judgment that forced the resignation of the corporation’s new director-general George Entwistle.
What happened to the BBC, however, was not unique. Failures of leadership and loss of nerve were everywhere in 2012, which was a wretched year for institutions of all kinds. The Church of England, whose hold on our national imagination has declined so precipitously in recent years, sank to a new low in the autumn. To most sensible people, the advent of women bishops is long overdue. Yet, in its wisdom, the Church’s General Synod chose to reject it.
It was a bad year, too, for the police, whose disgraceful dishonesty after the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, when they tried to smear innocent Liverpool fans who had been crushed to death, was finally exposed by an independent report.
Or take the British security services in Northern Ireland, whose involvement in the murder of solicitor Pat Finucane was at last admitted by a government inquiry.
This was, in fact, the year of the inquiry, which has become the Coalition’s stock response to challenges of any kind. Increasingly, it seems that whenever a difficult issue arises — such as the question of a new runway at Heathrow — the Government’s only answer is to convene yet another inquiry.
Meanwhile, the most notorious inquiry of all, Lord Justice Leveson’s investigation into phone hacking and journalistic misconduct, reached a sadly predictable conclusion with his calls for state regulation of the Press.
No sane person would dispute that papers such as the News of the World behaved disgracefully. There is a bitter irony, though, in the fact that Lord Justice Leveson’s proposals would interfere with the one thing most likely to bring scandals to light and hold the powerful to account — a free Press.
Yet the past year was not all doom and despondency. And surely not even the most cussed and curmudgeonly among us could deny that there was much to celebrate.
For while 2012 may have been a terrible year for the Establishment, it showed the British people at their best. The London Olympics were widely expected to be a complete washout. Many commentators — myself among them — predicted chaos on the roads, empty seats at the venues and a general air of apathy and disorganisation.
Never have I been happier to be proved wrong. From the splendid opening ceremony, a patriotic paean to the courage and imagination that have made Britain the envy of the world, to the selflessness of the volunteers, the dedication of our Armed Forces and the achievements of our athletes, the Games could hardly have been a better showcase for our country.
To my mind, they were more than a sporting sideshow. For what brought them alive was the generosity and public-spiritedness of thousands of ordinary people who gave their time without any thought of financial reward or self-interest.
Even the sportsmen and women who had so many of us cheering with full-hearted pride were reassuringly normal, down-to-earth people, from the sardonic Bradley Wiggins to Sheffield’s beloved Jessica Ennis.
And, of course, there was the admirable figure of Mo Farah, born in Somalia but now delighted to drape himself in the Union Jack without apology or ambiguity.
What made men and women like these such marvellous role models — in stark contrast to our arrogant footballers or our pampered politicians — is that they embody values long thought to have fallen from fashion.
They trained for long, punishing hours, pushing themselves to the limit, determined to produce the best possible performance they could.
In our public life, perhaps the only major figure who embodies a similar spirit of sheer dedication is the Queen herself, which is why so many millions of people wanted to pay her an emotional tribute during her Diamond Jubilee.
Despite the carping of a handful of second-rate intellectuals, the indisputable fact is that the vast majority of ordinary people have enormous affection for the monarchy.
If nothing else, it is the one institution — apart from our Armed Forces — that still stands unambiguously for the notion of public responsibility.
There is, however, something terribly worrying in the fact that other institutions seem unable to learn the obvious lessons and to bridge the gap between the people and the powerful.
From Europe to the economy, the gulf between our political class and the families it claims to represent has probably never been greater.
Popular unease about the extraordinary rise of immigration in the past ten years, as reflected in the latest census, is merely one symptom of a wider malaise. And it is hard to banish the fear that, in the long run, apathy and alienation will breed discontent and unrest.
The tragedy is that there is still so much to be proud of. No other country on earth could have hosted an Olympics with the wit, imagination and flair that we showed during those memorable summer weeks.
Our popular culture remains second to none, while our scientists and engineers are as ingenious as any in the world.
We will need them in 2013, which promises to be a hard year.
The economy is unlikely to improve, the Coalition inspires little confidence and the dreadful situation in Europe may well get worse.
Yet as this summer so magnificently proved, the British people have unmatched reserves of spirit, stoicism and selflessness. Perhaps, in the next 12 months, our national institutions and our political masters might start to emulate them.
It may sound an unlikely prospect, but stranger things have happened.
Where will 2012 stand in history? It was not one of the outstanding, iconic years like 1945, the year World War II ended, or 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell.
It saw no earth-shattering events to stand beside the collapse of the Soviet Union, the terrorist attacks on New York or the invasion of Iraq. In many ways, indeed, the story of 2012 was simply more of the same. In Britain, the Coalition limped miserably along, while the economy stubbornly refused to improve.
On the Continent, the euro staggered blindly from crisis to crisis. In the Middle East, the festering sore of the Israel-Palestine conflict claimed the lives of hundreds more victims, while the Arab Spring slid further into bloodshed.
And across the Atlantic, Barack Obama won an unexpectedly comfortable re-election against a backdrop of bitter ideological wrangling, fiscal brinkmanship and the horrifying massacres in Colorado and Connecticut.
Here in Britain, most will remember it as the year of two glorious public celebrations: the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and the Olympics.
After months of bad news, the summer’s events were a chance to remind ourselves that in the cultural and sporting arenas at least, British creativity and inspiration still lead the world.
It was, as one American newspaper put it, a year with a pronounced British accent, from the box-office triumphs of James Bond and the adaptation of Oxford don J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit, to our cricketers’ splendid series victory in India and our rugby team’s thrashing of the supposedly unbeatable All Blacks.
And yet, if 2012 had a British accent, it was not one that Bond author Ian Fleming, or indeed Tolkien, would have recognised. Last month’s release of the latest census results showed how much our country had changed during the years of New Labour rule.
Tolkien, a deeply religious man shaped by the horrors he witnessed on the Somme, would be astonished to discover that barely six out of ten people now call themselves Christians.
And Fleming, steeped in the values of Empire and convinced the British had a right to rule the world, would have been astounded by the news that almost eight million people in England and Wales were born abroad, while in London, white British residents are now a minority.
Patriotic: It was a year with a pronounced British accent, with box-office triumphs including James Bond and the adaptation of Oxford don J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit
Yet they grew up in an age that took duty seriously, prized responsibility, shrank from self-indulgence and had a profound, almost transcendent faith in the great institutions of the British Establishment.
Perhaps it is just as well, then, that they were not around to see what happened in Britain in 2012.
For there is no getting away from the fact that, as far as the country’s political and cultural establishment were concerned, this was probably the single worst year in living memory.
Almost every week seemed to bring new revelations of arrogance and wrongdoing, from the petty pilfering of some MPs such as Denis MacShane — who even invented institutions and forged signatures to help himself to Parliamentary expenses — to the appalling allegations swirling around the squalid, shell-suited figure of the late Jimmy Savile.
Shocking: Almost every week seemed to bring new revelations of arrogance and wrongdoing, including the appalling allegations swirling around the squalid, shell-suited figure of the late Jimmy Savile
Indeed, the grotesque farce of the elections for local police commissioners — which were so badly publicised that one polling station in Wales recorded no votes at all — speaks volumes about the corrosion of popular interest in politics.
It is little wonder that many ordinary people feel they have no stake in the political process. At the top, they see an unhappy Coalition riven by childish bickering, opposed by a Labour Party that often seems to have lost all gumption, guts and soul.
They see one of our best-known backbench MPs, the outspoken Nadine Dorries, choosing to abandon her constituents for the tawdry attractions of I’m A Celebrity . . . Get Me Out of Here! — a decision that turned politics itself into a national laughing stock.
And when many voters picture their political representatives, they imagine characters like Denis MacShane, the expenses fiddler, or Andrew Mitchell, the short-lived Tory Chief Whip who was accused of referring to police officers as plebs.
Andrew Mitchell, the short-lived Tory Chief Whip, was accused of referring to police officers as plebs
For me, the really revealing thing about it is simply that it sounds so plausible. Sadly, it is the kind of remark most of us can imagine our privileged political masters saying, even if only under their breath.
The truth is that our institutions have never felt more unaccountable, arrogant and out of touch than they did in 2012. And that, in turn, explains why, although history is littered with largely forgotten scandals, the Jimmy Savile affair will surely echo down the years.
It had already been a bad year for the BBC. Its disastrously frivolous coverage of the Jubilee river pageant was widely regarded as one of the lowest points in its recent history, even attracting fierce criticism from the corporation’s own star performers.
But the Savile scandal was in a different league. At the very least, it suggested that for decades the BBC had been harbouring a malignant child abuser whom it then shrank from exposing because, if some accounts are to be believed, Newsnight’s revelations clashed with BBC1’s plans for a tribute to the ghastly Savile.
What was worse was that the BBC, as though punch-drunk from the inevitable storm of criticism, then contrived to smear a completely innocent man, Lord McAlpine, as a child abuser himself — a calamitous error of judgment that forced the resignation of the corporation’s new director-general George Entwistle.
What happened to the BBC, however, was not unique. Failures of leadership and loss of nerve were everywhere in 2012, which was a wretched year for institutions of all kinds. The Church of England, whose hold on our national imagination has declined so precipitously in recent years, sank to a new low in the autumn. To most sensible people, the advent of women bishops is long overdue. Yet, in its wisdom, the Church’s General Synod chose to reject it.
It was a bad year, too, for the police, whose disgraceful dishonesty after the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, when they tried to smear innocent Liverpool fans who had been crushed to death, was finally exposed by an independent report.
Or take the British security services in Northern Ireland, whose involvement in the murder of solicitor Pat Finucane was at last admitted by a government inquiry.
This was, in fact, the year of the inquiry, which has become the Coalition’s stock response to challenges of any kind. Increasingly, it seems that whenever a difficult issue arises — such as the question of a new runway at Heathrow — the Government’s only answer is to convene yet another inquiry.
Stock response: Increasingly, it seems that whenever a difficult issue arises, the Government's only answer is to convene yet another inquiry
No sane person would dispute that papers such as the News of the World behaved disgracefully. There is a bitter irony, though, in the fact that Lord Justice Leveson’s proposals would interfere with the one thing most likely to bring scandals to light and hold the powerful to account — a free Press.
Yet the past year was not all doom and despondency. And surely not even the most cussed and curmudgeonly among us could deny that there was much to celebrate.
For while 2012 may have been a terrible year for the Establishment, it showed the British people at their best. The London Olympics were widely expected to be a complete washout. Many commentators — myself among them — predicted chaos on the roads, empty seats at the venues and a general air of apathy and disorganisation.
Never have I been happier to be proved wrong. From the splendid opening ceremony, a patriotic paean to the courage and imagination that have made Britain the envy of the world, to the selflessness of the volunteers, the dedication of our Armed Forces and the achievements of our athletes, the Games could hardly have been a better showcase for our country.
Proud: Even the sportsmen and women who had so many of us cheering with full-hearted pride were reassuringly down-to-earth people, from the sardonic Bradley Wiggins to Sheffield's beloved Jessica Ennis
Even the sportsmen and women who had so many of us cheering with full-hearted pride were reassuringly normal, down-to-earth people, from the sardonic Bradley Wiggins to Sheffield’s beloved Jessica Ennis.
And, of course, there was the admirable figure of Mo Farah, born in Somalia but now delighted to drape himself in the Union Jack without apology or ambiguity.
What made men and women like these such marvellous role models — in stark contrast to our arrogant footballers or our pampered politicians — is that they embody values long thought to have fallen from fashion.
They trained for long, punishing hours, pushing themselves to the limit, determined to produce the best possible performance they could.
Admirable: Mo Farah was born in Somalia but draped himself in the Union Jack without apology or ambiguity
Despite the carping of a handful of second-rate intellectuals, the indisputable fact is that the vast majority of ordinary people have enormous affection for the monarchy.
If nothing else, it is the one institution — apart from our Armed Forces — that still stands unambiguously for the notion of public responsibility.
There is, however, something terribly worrying in the fact that other institutions seem unable to learn the obvious lessons and to bridge the gap between the people and the powerful.
From Europe to the economy, the gulf between our political class and the families it claims to represent has probably never been greater.
Popular unease about the extraordinary rise of immigration in the past ten years, as reflected in the latest census, is merely one symptom of a wider malaise. And it is hard to banish the fear that, in the long run, apathy and alienation will breed discontent and unrest.
The tragedy is that there is still so much to be proud of. No other country on earth could have hosted an Olympics with the wit, imagination and flair that we showed during those memorable summer weeks.
Our popular culture remains second to none, while our scientists and engineers are as ingenious as any in the world.
We will need them in 2013, which promises to be a hard year.
The economy is unlikely to improve, the Coalition inspires little confidence and the dreadful situation in Europe may well get worse.
Yet as this summer so magnificently proved, the British people have unmatched reserves of spirit, stoicism and selflessness. Perhaps, in the next 12 months, our national institutions and our political masters might start to emulate them.
It may sound an unlikely prospect, but stranger things have happened.
Youtube discovers billions of fraudulent viewings
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2254181/YouTube-wipes-billions-video-views-finding-faked-music-industry.html
Reminds me of how cars mileage used to be clocked.
Reminds me of how cars mileage used to be clocked.
Very few scientists coming to research in UK
And even the photo in the Telegraph discourages people coming here! Shows you our subconscious!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9767560/Visa-scheme-to-attract-1000-top-scientists-and-artists-gets-just-50-to-settle-in-Britain.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9767560/Visa-scheme-to-attract-1000-top-scientists-and-artists-gets-just-50-to-settle-in-Britain.html
EU is clearly not founded on the cornerstone of life
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9767877/Europe-would-unravel-if-Britain-were-to-repatriate-powers-says-Herman-van-Rompuy.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253956/UK-cherry-pick-choose-powers-claw-Brussels-EU-president-warns.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/27/david-cameron-eu-herman-van-rompuy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/27/eu-britain-european-destiny
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253956/UK-cherry-pick-choose-powers-claw-Brussels-EU-president-warns.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/27/david-cameron-eu-herman-van-rompuy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/27/eu-britain-european-destiny
Herman van Rompuy, one of Europe's most senior figures, said countries like
Britain cannot simply "cherry pick" which laws from Brussels they wish to
follow.
Mr Cameron has promised a "fresh settlement" with Brussels amid pressure from
his backbenchers to give the British public a say on whether to leave the EU.
He is widely expected to make a speech in the new year outlining plans for a
referendum in 2015, which would voters a choice between a new relationship with
Europe and leaving altogether.
Mr Cameron will fight for Britain to stay in the EU on new terms but European
leaders are worried that allowing Britain to "repatriate" powers could pave the
way for an exit and encourage other countries to seek similar deals.
In an interview with the Guardian, Mr van Rompuy last night issued a warning
that countries must not "seek to undermine" the EU by seeking special
privileges.
He said the whole European project could fall apart if all member states only
looked out for their own interests.
"If every member state were able to cherry-pick those parts of existing policies that they most like, and opt out of those that they least like, the union in general, and the single market in particular, would soon unravel," he said.
"All member states can, and do, have particular requests and needs that are always taken into consideration as part of our deliberations. I do not expect any member state to seek to undermine the fundamentals of our co-operative system in Europe."
Mr van Rompuy's intervention comes after Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat deputy Prime Minister, warned that Britain must not back out of Europe.
This week, he dismissed plans for a referendum on the country’s membership of the EU as “putting the cart before the horse”.
He argued against offering a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU and says that Britain should instead be exercising its leadership role in Europe.
The deputy Prime Minister insists that he is “not frightened” of a public vote but says that such a suggestion is premature given the uncertainty surrounding plans to rewrite the Lisbon treaty to try to underpin the euro.
Mr Cameron has already promised Conservative MPs that the party will fight the election on a “clear Eurosceptic position”.
He wants Britain to take a step back from Europe as the countries in the eurozone country make plans to join together in a "super-state" with closer political and financial integration.
A poll yesterday showed that most Britons now want to leave Europe, with 51 per cent saying they would vote for an exit – in a marked hardening of eurosceptic attitudes.
"If every member state were able to cherry-pick those parts of existing policies that they most like, and opt out of those that they least like, the union in general, and the single market in particular, would soon unravel," he said.
"All member states can, and do, have particular requests and needs that are always taken into consideration as part of our deliberations. I do not expect any member state to seek to undermine the fundamentals of our co-operative system in Europe."
Mr van Rompuy's intervention comes after Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat deputy Prime Minister, warned that Britain must not back out of Europe.
This week, he dismissed plans for a referendum on the country’s membership of the EU as “putting the cart before the horse”.
He argued against offering a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU and says that Britain should instead be exercising its leadership role in Europe.
The deputy Prime Minister insists that he is “not frightened” of a public vote but says that such a suggestion is premature given the uncertainty surrounding plans to rewrite the Lisbon treaty to try to underpin the euro.
Mr Cameron has already promised Conservative MPs that the party will fight the election on a “clear Eurosceptic position”.
He wants Britain to take a step back from Europe as the countries in the eurozone country make plans to join together in a "super-state" with closer political and financial integration.
A poll yesterday showed that most Britons now want to leave Europe, with 51 per cent saying they would vote for an exit – in a marked hardening of eurosceptic attitudes.
Thursday, 27 December 2012
High Court Judge attacks Government over same sex marriage proposals
The Light shines in the darkness
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253572/Julie-Keith-letter-Plea-help-Chinese-labor-camp-worker-stuffed-Oregon-womans-Halloween-decorations.html
What she didn't expect was a desperate plea for help from one of the Chinese laborers forced to make the holiday decorations in brutal conditions.
The 42-year-old charity worker from Portland discovered the chilling letter hidden between the two novelty headstones when she opened the kit in October.
'Sir: If you occasionally buy this product, please kindly resend this letter to the World Human Right Organization,' the unsigned note, that was folded into eighths, read.
'Thousands people here who are under the persicution [sic] of the Chinese Communist Party Government will thank and remember you forever.'
The letter's author said the Halloween product was made in Masanjia Labor Camp in Shenyang, China, where laborers are forced to work for 15 hours a day without time off on the weekends and holidays.
'Otherwise, they will suffer torturement, beat and rude remark. [sic] Nearly no payment,' they wrote in choppy English accompanied by Chinese characters.
The plea said workers at the labor camp make only 10 yuan per month - the equivalent to $1.61.
The China director at Human Rights Watch, Sophie Richardson, told The Oregonian that the origin or authenticity of the letter couldn't be confirmed.
'We're in no position to confirm the veracity or origin of this,' she said. 'I think it is fair to say the conditions described in the letter certainly conform to what we know about conditions in re-education through labor camps.'
China's re-education through labor is a system of punishment that allows for detention without trial.
Masanjia labor camp is located in the industrialized capital of the Liaoning Province in northeast China.
'If this thing is the real deal, that's somebody saying please help me, please know about me, please react,' Richardson told The Oregonian. 'That's our job.'
Keith certainlythinks it is genuine.
She said she analyzed the product packaging and showed it to a Chinese co-worker at the Portland Goodwill store, where she is a donations manager, and they thought it looked authentic.
'I fully believe it is real,' she told Fox News, describing how the headstones where the letter was found were sealed together and the box was closed with tape.
'It had to [have] come from where they said.'
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations is looking into the note. Keith said she had handed over the box of decorations and the letter to ICE agents to help in the investigation.
Keith actually purchased the box of decorations more than a year ago and only decided to pull them out this year because her five-year-old daughter was having a pre-Halloween birthday party.
She said at one point she considered donating the unopened $29.99 Kmart graveyard kit. But she opened it and found the letter, which had travelled some 5,000 miles over the Pacific Ocean to get to her home.
Keith's first instinct was to turn to Facebook to ask her friends for tips on what to do and to spread the message.
'I found this in a box of Halloween decorations,' she typed beneath a photo of the letter. The post quickly prompted a flurry of responses.
'I'm sure that person feared for his/her life to include that letter in the products, but it was a chance they were obviously willing to take,' one friend wrote, according to The Oregonian. 'We take our freedom for granted!'
'What's weird to me is someone is actually thinking about, and praying something comes of this... every day of their life since they sent it out,' another wrote. 'Makes me sad this even happens.'
Sears Holdings Corporation, which owns Kmart, said in a statement that it was also investigating the matter.
'Sears Holdings has a Global Compliance Program which helps to ensure that vendors and factories producing merchandise for our company adhere to specific Program Requirements, and all local laws pertaining to employment standards and workplace practices,' the company said.
'Failure to comply with any of the Program Requirements, including the use of forced labor, may result in a loss of business or factory termination.'
Plea for help from Chinese labor camp worker paid $1.61 per MONTH found stuffed in Oregon woman's Halloween decorations from Kmart
Oregon mother Julie Keith expected to find Styrofoam headstones in the graveyard kit she bought at Kmart for Halloween.What she didn't expect was a desperate plea for help from one of the Chinese laborers forced to make the holiday decorations in brutal conditions.
The 42-year-old charity worker from Portland discovered the chilling letter hidden between the two novelty headstones when she opened the kit in October.
Plea for help: The letter, pictured, came in a box of Halloween decorations purchased at Kmart
'Thousands people here who are under the persicution [sic] of the Chinese Communist Party Government will thank and remember you forever.'
The letter's author said the Halloween product was made in Masanjia Labor Camp in Shenyang, China, where laborers are forced to work for 15 hours a day without time off on the weekends and holidays.
'Otherwise, they will suffer torturement, beat and rude remark. [sic] Nearly no payment,' they wrote in choppy English accompanied by Chinese characters.
The plea said workers at the labor camp make only 10 yuan per month - the equivalent to $1.61.
The China director at Human Rights Watch, Sophie Richardson, told The Oregonian that the origin or authenticity of the letter couldn't be confirmed.
'We're in no position to confirm the veracity or origin of this,' she said. 'I think it is fair to say the conditions described in the letter certainly conform to what we know about conditions in re-education through labor camps.'
China's re-education through labor is a system of punishment that allows for detention without trial.
Masanjia labor camp is located in the industrialized capital of the Liaoning Province in northeast China.
Keith certainlythinks it is genuine.
She said she analyzed the product packaging and showed it to a Chinese co-worker at the Portland Goodwill store, where she is a donations manager, and they thought it looked authentic.
'I fully believe it is real,' she told Fox News, describing how the headstones where the letter was found were sealed together and the box was closed with tape.
'It had to [have] come from where they said.'
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations is looking into the note. Keith said she had handed over the box of decorations and the letter to ICE agents to help in the investigation.
Keith actually purchased the box of decorations more than a year ago and only decided to pull them out this year because her five-year-old daughter was having a pre-Halloween birthday party.
She said at one point she considered donating the unopened $29.99 Kmart graveyard kit. But she opened it and found the letter, which had travelled some 5,000 miles over the Pacific Ocean to get to her home.
'I found this in a box of Halloween decorations,' she typed beneath a photo of the letter. The post quickly prompted a flurry of responses.
'I'm sure that person feared for his/her life to include that letter in the products, but it was a chance they were obviously willing to take,' one friend wrote, according to The Oregonian. 'We take our freedom for granted!'
'What's weird to me is someone is actually thinking about, and praying something comes of this... every day of their life since they sent it out,' another wrote. 'Makes me sad this even happens.'
Sears Holdings Corporation, which owns Kmart, said in a statement that it was also investigating the matter.
'Sears Holdings has a Global Compliance Program which helps to ensure that vendors and factories producing merchandise for our company adhere to specific Program Requirements, and all local laws pertaining to employment standards and workplace practices,' the company said.
'Failure to comply with any of the Program Requirements, including the use of forced labor, may result in a loss of business or factory termination.'
How Big Brother can switch off a source of information at the flick fo a switch
Now we can see how Big Brother could operate.
Rather than identifying those flouting the system and bringing them to justice, just close down the system for everyone!
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/bbc-shuts-down-thorn-tree-travel-forum-on-lonely-planet-website-over-uncomfortable-themes-8431501.html
Rather than identifying those flouting the system and bringing them to justice, just close down the system for everyone!
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/bbc-shuts-down-thorn-tree-travel-forum-on-lonely-planet-website-over-uncomfortable-themes-8431501.html
Government investment into new material graphene
New health system in hospitals to spot child abuse
Liberal democrats are pro Europe
I've tended to link liberty with being liberal, but now I see this is not so. So I have no idea what being liberal means now.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9766846/Nick-Clegg-warns-David-Cameron-not-to-back-out-of-Europe.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/26/clegg-warning-cameron-britain-europe
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9766846/Nick-Clegg-warns-David-Cameron-not-to-back-out-of-Europe.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/26/clegg-warning-cameron-britain-europe
Wednesday, 26 December 2012
Gay marriage : now the ruling elite shows us its ultimate sanction
Interesting.....now we see true democracy at work!
If this act is really invoked then it will be clear we will now know how the ruling elites of Britain are the Emperors of this country. "There are no gods but the ruling elite in Britain", This act has been used before for fox hunting - so such Emperors have been around longer than I thought.
I will never be a Britianist!
Freedom will be shown for what it really is.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9766783/Coalition-may-use-nuclear-option-to-force-through-gay-marriage-law.html
If this act is really invoked then it will be clear we will now know how the ruling elites of Britain are the Emperors of this country. "There are no gods but the ruling elite in Britain", This act has been used before for fox hunting - so such Emperors have been around longer than I thought.
I will never be a Britianist!
Freedom will be shown for what it really is.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9766783/Coalition-may-use-nuclear-option-to-force-through-gay-marriage-law.html
Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary, has signalled that the Government might
be prepared to use the Parliament Act to get its planned “equal marriage”
legislation on to the statute book if it is rejected in the Lords.
The Act, which has been used only seven times in the past century, is
sometimes described as the “nuclear” option of parliamentary process to break
stalemates between the Commons and the Lords. It asserts the superiority of the
House of Commons by allowing Bills that cannot clear the Lords to become law,
but is intended to be used only in exceptional circumstances.
The Act was last used by the Blair government to force through the ban on
foxhunting after years of acrimony over the issue.
Despite predictions that almost half of Tory MPs will vote against same-sex
marriage in a free vote, the proposal is likely to secure a majority in the
Commons with the support of Labour and Liberal Democrat members. But the
situation in the Lords is less clear, with almost equal numbers of Tory and
Labour peers but a large independent contingent as well as 26 Church of England
bishops.
Some peers have already predicted that the Bill could be sunk in the Lords
even if it passes the Commons. Mrs Miller has been asked repeatedly in recent
days whether she would rule out using the Parliament Act but has sidestepped the
question by saying that she was confident the Lords would back the measure.
An official statement from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport said
only: “We do not foresee that this will be the case and have no plans to do so.”
David Cameron’s popularity among homosexual voters has risen since he backed same-sex marriage, according to a poll for Pink News, an online publication for homosexuals. Just 11 per cent voted Conservative at the last general election, but this would rise to 30 per cent if a vote were called tomorrow.
David Cameron’s popularity among homosexual voters has risen since he backed same-sex marriage, according to a poll for Pink News, an online publication for homosexuals. Just 11 per cent voted Conservative at the last general election, but this would rise to 30 per cent if a vote were called tomorrow.
Tuesday, 25 December 2012
Something has gone terribly wrong with how we care for our elderly
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253199/Middle-class-care-fiasco-PM-backed-35-000-cap-fees--elderly-face-paying-double.html
Job 12:12 " With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding."
Proverbs 16:13 "The hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousness."
Psalm 92:14 "They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing;"
Proverbs 17:6 " Children's children are the crown of old men; and the glory of children are their fathers."
Psalm 71:9 "Cast me not off in the time of old age; forsake me not when my strength faileth."
Middle-class couples who need residential care in old age could be hit with bills as high as £150,000.
Under Coalition plans to be unveiled in the New Year, the upper limit on the amount that must be contributed towards care could be £60,000 or even £75,000 per person.
This ‘cap’ is much higher than the £35,000 suggested by last year’s independent review into England’s care funding system.
If both husband and wife end up moving into residential care, it could mean they will have to pay out up to £150,000 before the state steps in.
In addition, they will still have to meet accommodation costs – the ‘bed and board’ charge for care home stays. This could push the total outlay to almost £200,000.
Critics say setting the cap so high will do little to stop thousands of pensioners having to sell their homes each year, denying their children an inheritance.
And they are likely to accuse David Cameron of letting the elderly down, as Downing Street has previously attracted positive coverage by backing the review’s proposal of a £35,000 cap.
At present, care home residents can be landed with unlimited charges if they have assets, including their house, of more than £23,500. Those who have no savings get care completely free.
Ministers have pledged to increase this threshold to £100,000, meaning people will no longer see their savings depleted to below this level.
But the benefit could be wiped out by the imposition of a cap that is more than double the amount that was originally expected.
In addition, it is understood that the new system may not even be put in place until as late as 2017, despite promises to sort the issue out before the next General Election, due in 2015.
At least 20,000 elderly people have to sell their homes every year to pay unlimited care costs.
Last year, a Government-commissioned report by economist Andrew Dilnot concluded that a lifetime cap should be imposed of between £35,000 and £50,000, with the state stepping in to pay the rest.
At that time, a senior Conservative source told the Daily Mail: ‘The Prime Minister said “We’ve got to do Dilnot. We’re going to do this”.’
Mr Cameron said: ‘I hope to be able to announce the way forward by the next election but we’ve got to find the money first. It seems to me absolutely vital.’ He added that he was confident the funding would be found.
But Chancellor George Osborne balked at the estimated £1.7billion a year cost at a time when he is trying to bring down Britain’s deficit.
To bring down the cost, it seems ministers are considering a higher cap of £60,000 or perhaps even £75,000, meaning the state will not be called upon to pay as much.
The cap would be for individuals, meaning that couples could be asked to pay £150,000. In addition, the cap only covers the cost of nursing and personal care, such as help with washing and dressing.
It does not include the ‘bed and board’ cost of food and heating, which add up to between £7,000 and £10,000 a year.
Residents would have to pay this on top of their care fees, potentially pushing the total cost towards the £200,000 level.
Whitehall sources said that no final decision had been taken on the level of the cap, but that ‘the higher end of what has been speculated is most likely’.
Professor Dilnot also suggested that the assets threshold of £23,500, below which people have to pay nothing towards their residential care, should be raised substantially to £100,000.
It is likely that ministers will respect this part of his recommendations.
Last night Ros Altmann, director general of the over-50s group Saga, said such a high cap would be a ‘betrayal’ of pensioners.
‘A £75,000 cap is too high and would still mean most middle-class families, especially outside London, would lose their home and life savings because the cap excludes accommodation costs which will be many thousands more,’ she said.
‘This high a cap would not allow an insurance market to develop and is more than double the £35,000 recommended by Dilnot.’
The social care plan is one of the key parts of a Coalition ‘mid-term review’, which will also involve a commitment to introduce a single-tier state pension of about £140 a week.
The review will include measures to cut the cost of childcare, and is expected to commit ministers to new ways to fund the motorway and trunk road network, such as by handing construction and maintenance to the private sector.
A Department of Health Spokesperson said: 'We want this country to be one of the best places in Europe to grow old and that is why in July we announced the most extensive reforms of care and support in over 60 years.
'As part of the reforms, we committed to taking action to ensure people do not have to sell their homes to pay for care.
'We also agreed that the Dilnot Commission's model of the cap on care costs is the right basis for any new funding model, but given the current economic situation, we need to look carefully at how we can pay for this.'
Job 12:12 " With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding."
Proverbs 16:13 "The hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousness."
Psalm 92:14 "They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing;"
Proverbs 17:6 " Children's children are the crown of old men; and the glory of children are their fathers."
Psalm 71:9 "Cast me not off in the time of old age; forsake me not when my strength faileth."
Middle-class couples who need residential care in old age could be hit with bills as high as £150,000.
Under Coalition plans to be unveiled in the New Year, the upper limit on the amount that must be contributed towards care could be £60,000 or even £75,000 per person.
This ‘cap’ is much higher than the £35,000 suggested by last year’s independent review into England’s care funding system.
If both husband and wife end up moving into residential care, it could mean they will have to pay out up to £150,000 before the state steps in.
In addition, they will still have to meet accommodation costs – the ‘bed and board’ charge for care home stays. This could push the total outlay to almost £200,000.
Critics say setting the cap so high will do little to stop thousands of pensioners having to sell their homes each year, denying their children an inheritance.
And they are likely to accuse David Cameron of letting the elderly down, as Downing Street has previously attracted positive coverage by backing the review’s proposal of a £35,000 cap.
At present, care home residents can be landed with unlimited charges if they have assets, including their house, of more than £23,500. Those who have no savings get care completely free.
Ministers have pledged to increase this threshold to £100,000, meaning people will no longer see their savings depleted to below this level.
But the benefit could be wiped out by the imposition of a cap that is more than double the amount that was originally expected.
In addition, it is understood that the new system may not even be put in place until as late as 2017, despite promises to sort the issue out before the next General Election, due in 2015.
At least 20,000 elderly people have to sell their homes every year to pay unlimited care costs.
At that time, a senior Conservative source told the Daily Mail: ‘The Prime Minister said “We’ve got to do Dilnot. We’re going to do this”.’
Mr Cameron said: ‘I hope to be able to announce the way forward by the next election but we’ve got to find the money first. It seems to me absolutely vital.’ He added that he was confident the funding would be found.
But Chancellor George Osborne balked at the estimated £1.7billion a year cost at a time when he is trying to bring down Britain’s deficit.
The cap would be for individuals, meaning that couples could be asked to pay £150,000. In addition, the cap only covers the cost of nursing and personal care, such as help with washing and dressing.
It does not include the ‘bed and board’ cost of food and heating, which add up to between £7,000 and £10,000 a year.
Residents would have to pay this on top of their care fees, potentially pushing the total cost towards the £200,000 level.
Whitehall sources said that no final decision had been taken on the level of the cap, but that ‘the higher end of what has been speculated is most likely’.
Professor Dilnot also suggested that the assets threshold of £23,500, below which people have to pay nothing towards their residential care, should be raised substantially to £100,000.
It is likely that ministers will respect this part of his recommendations.
Last night Ros Altmann, director general of the over-50s group Saga, said such a high cap would be a ‘betrayal’ of pensioners.
‘A £75,000 cap is too high and would still mean most middle-class families, especially outside London, would lose their home and life savings because the cap excludes accommodation costs which will be many thousands more,’ she said.
‘This high a cap would not allow an insurance market to develop and is more than double the £35,000 recommended by Dilnot.’
The social care plan is one of the key parts of a Coalition ‘mid-term review’, which will also involve a commitment to introduce a single-tier state pension of about £140 a week.
The review will include measures to cut the cost of childcare, and is expected to commit ministers to new ways to fund the motorway and trunk road network, such as by handing construction and maintenance to the private sector.
A Department of Health Spokesperson said: 'We want this country to be one of the best places in Europe to grow old and that is why in July we announced the most extensive reforms of care and support in over 60 years.
'As part of the reforms, we committed to taking action to ensure people do not have to sell their homes to pay for care.
'We also agreed that the Dilnot Commission's model of the cap on care costs is the right basis for any new funding model, but given the current economic situation, we need to look carefully at how we can pay for this.'
Miracle : 15 week old unborn child survives premature birth
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/baby-born-at-just-15-weeks-1505200
A hospital's smallest surviving premature baby defied all the odds to make it home for Christmas after her older sister “asked Santa” to make it happen.
Amber-May Bass weighed just over 1lb – little more than a tin of baked beans – when she was born 15 weeks early by emergency caesarean on August 3.
But she has since made a good recovery and is well enough to spend the festive period with her family – granting her six-year-old sister Jenna-Rose’s wish.
Amber-May, now 20 weeks, was the smallest surviving baby to be born at the West Suffolk Hospital in Bury St Edmunds.
Her parents Nikkie Palmer, 34, and Andrew Bass, 27, of Stowmarket, Suffolk, feared she would not live to see Christmas.
But Amber-May, who was transferred to Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, the day after she was born, now weighs a positively plump 5lb 11oz.
Nikkie said: “She’s the best present we could ever have hoped for.
"I really thought this Christmas would never come. She’s doing well.”
Paediatrician Dr Ian Evans added: “As far as I’m aware she’s our smallest baby who has survived.”
A hospital's smallest surviving premature baby defied all the odds to make it home for Christmas after her older sister “asked Santa” to make it happen.
Amber-May Bass weighed just over 1lb – little more than a tin of baked beans – when she was born 15 weeks early by emergency caesarean on August 3.
But she has since made a good recovery and is well enough to spend the festive period with her family – granting her six-year-old sister Jenna-Rose’s wish.
Amber-May, now 20 weeks, was the smallest surviving baby to be born at the West Suffolk Hospital in Bury St Edmunds.
Her parents Nikkie Palmer, 34, and Andrew Bass, 27, of Stowmarket, Suffolk, feared she would not live to see Christmas.
But Amber-May, who was transferred to Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, the day after she was born, now weighs a positively plump 5lb 11oz.
Nikkie said: “She’s the best present we could ever have hoped for.
"I really thought this Christmas would never come. She’s doing well.”
Paediatrician Dr Ian Evans added: “As far as I’m aware she’s our smallest baby who has survived.”
A summary of 2012 according to the Independent
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/review-of-2012-our-writers-and-tweeters-look-back-at-a-years-news-from-space-to-the-jungle-8424648.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/review-of-uk-politics-in-2012-it-was-the-seventies-all-over-again-8424667.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/review-of-the-media-in-2012-secrets-from-beyond-the-grave-8424657.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/review-of-the-economy-in-2012-this-was-not-supposed-to-happen-8424651.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/review-of-the-eurozone-in-2012-a-crisis-of-debt-and-identity-8424654.html
In General
So what was that all about? One minute you're wondering what the year might have in store; the next you're wondering what, if anything, you'll remember it for.
In a sense, it's the same question: when someone mentions '2012' in years to
come, what memories will it conjure in your mind? It's no easier to answer than
it was back in January. Some obvious subject-headings suggest themselves, now as
then: the Olympics; the Leveson inquiry; the re-election of president Obama;
and, presumably, some aspect of the Middle East's travails. The rest is
speculation.
There will, inevitably, have been deeper themes: turning-points and watersheds for which future historians will use '2012' as shorthand. But it's far too early to pick them out. Was this the year that the first nail was hammered into what would become the coffin of British press freedom? The year the eurozone crisis hit rock bottom? The year the US finally faced up to the perils of climate change? Perhaps. Or perhaps all three propositions are closer to being the opposite of the truth.
Only time will tell. In retrospect, we can look back at 1812 and recognise instantly that this was the year when the outcome of the hitherto endless-seeming Napoleonic wars was determined. It may not have seemed so obvious at the time; just as it probably wasn't obvious that the assassination that same year of a serving British prime minister would never really lodge itself in public memory. But the death of Spencer Perceval, unlike the failed invasion of Russia, didn't change history.
Sometimes, of course, years are remembered not for historic turning-points but for events that resonate on a more human scale. All sorts of things happened in 1912 that would change history, principally by helping to cause the First World War. But all that most of us can tell you about it is that it was the year of the Titanic disaster – and (if we are especially clever) of Captain Scott's disastrous race to the South Pole.
There has been no shortage of compelling human dramas in 2012. It seems possible, though, that some of the biggest – the Jimmy Savile scandals, for example, or the murder of a British family in Annecy – are simply too harrowing to make a permanent mark, and will turn out instead to be things we sweep under a carpet of forgetting as soon as we decently can.
As for the other stories that once made deafening headlines (leaving aside the Olympics, which we celebrate today in a separate sport supplement), it's alarming how quickly most of them have faded. Would you associate 2012 with the belated conviction of two of Stephen Lawrence's murderers? With the Costa Concordia disaster? With the Queen's Diamond Jubilee? With Felix Baumgartner's leap from space? Or with the 'cash for access' scandal?
Would you, asked what you remembered about the year, have mentioned 'Pastygate', 'Plebgate', 'Calm down, dear', the resignation of Fabio Capello? The shaming of Bob Diamond? Samantha Brick? Naked Prince Harry? All these were huge talking-points at the time; most already feel like obscure historical footnotes.
Perhaps it's just me, or perhaps our attention spans have grown too short for events to resonate for a full 12 months. If a news story does run and run, it's usually because it's a broad issue (the ailing economy, corporate tax avoidance, extreme weather, the Church of England's sexual difficulties) that keeps returning in a different form. Such themes are hardly unique to 2012.
I suspect that – Olympics apart – the stories that truly define the year have yet to be recognised, although in retrospect they may well seem obvious. A time may come when every schoolchild knows that the Higgs boson was found in 2012; or that this was the year when the dieback fungus arrived that would wipe out every ash tree in the UK. Perhaps this year heard the first shots fired in the great Sino-Japanese war – or the last shots fired in the Syrian revolt. Perhaps this was when Julian Assange began his 40-year stay in the Ecuadorian embassy.
History is capricious about what it preserves and what it consigns to its dustbin. Some years – 1712, for example – are remembered for barely anything. (Try it, if you run out of party games.) We can speculate all Christmas about which events of 2012 will echo through the ages, but your guess is as good as ours; which is why, in this Review of the Year issue, we don't attempt to distinguish between events that changed the world and those that simply changed the moment.
Like every year, this one has been exhilarating in its complexity. From politics to the press, fashion to foreign affairs, royalty to the environment – every category has produced contradictory messages. (Was it the great British drought that defined our environmental year, or the great British floods, or the great British freeze?) Over the next 22 pages, our specialist writers look back on the moments that meant most to them, under 14 headings. (The arts, and sport, have their own supplement.)
The overall theme is 'the long and short of it' – with each topic accompanied by a memorable image and the tweets that sometimes capture, best of all, the spirit of a particular event.
What you make of it all is up to you. What history makes of it remains to be seen. But we can make one pronouncement about the significance of 2012: it was the year the world didn't end.
For decades – some say centuries – New Age enthusiasts and admirers of the ancient Mayans have held that the end of the world would take place on 21 December 2012; a belief so popular that, until recently, it was the main result thrown up by an internet search for '2012'.
At the time of going to press, however, the world hadn't ended. If you're reading this, it still hasn't.
In Politics
There will, inevitably, have been deeper themes: turning-points and watersheds for which future historians will use '2012' as shorthand. But it's far too early to pick them out. Was this the year that the first nail was hammered into what would become the coffin of British press freedom? The year the eurozone crisis hit rock bottom? The year the US finally faced up to the perils of climate change? Perhaps. Or perhaps all three propositions are closer to being the opposite of the truth.
Only time will tell. In retrospect, we can look back at 1812 and recognise instantly that this was the year when the outcome of the hitherto endless-seeming Napoleonic wars was determined. It may not have seemed so obvious at the time; just as it probably wasn't obvious that the assassination that same year of a serving British prime minister would never really lodge itself in public memory. But the death of Spencer Perceval, unlike the failed invasion of Russia, didn't change history.
Sometimes, of course, years are remembered not for historic turning-points but for events that resonate on a more human scale. All sorts of things happened in 1912 that would change history, principally by helping to cause the First World War. But all that most of us can tell you about it is that it was the year of the Titanic disaster – and (if we are especially clever) of Captain Scott's disastrous race to the South Pole.
There has been no shortage of compelling human dramas in 2012. It seems possible, though, that some of the biggest – the Jimmy Savile scandals, for example, or the murder of a British family in Annecy – are simply too harrowing to make a permanent mark, and will turn out instead to be things we sweep under a carpet of forgetting as soon as we decently can.
As for the other stories that once made deafening headlines (leaving aside the Olympics, which we celebrate today in a separate sport supplement), it's alarming how quickly most of them have faded. Would you associate 2012 with the belated conviction of two of Stephen Lawrence's murderers? With the Costa Concordia disaster? With the Queen's Diamond Jubilee? With Felix Baumgartner's leap from space? Or with the 'cash for access' scandal?
Would you, asked what you remembered about the year, have mentioned 'Pastygate', 'Plebgate', 'Calm down, dear', the resignation of Fabio Capello? The shaming of Bob Diamond? Samantha Brick? Naked Prince Harry? All these were huge talking-points at the time; most already feel like obscure historical footnotes.
Perhaps it's just me, or perhaps our attention spans have grown too short for events to resonate for a full 12 months. If a news story does run and run, it's usually because it's a broad issue (the ailing economy, corporate tax avoidance, extreme weather, the Church of England's sexual difficulties) that keeps returning in a different form. Such themes are hardly unique to 2012.
I suspect that – Olympics apart – the stories that truly define the year have yet to be recognised, although in retrospect they may well seem obvious. A time may come when every schoolchild knows that the Higgs boson was found in 2012; or that this was the year when the dieback fungus arrived that would wipe out every ash tree in the UK. Perhaps this year heard the first shots fired in the great Sino-Japanese war – or the last shots fired in the Syrian revolt. Perhaps this was when Julian Assange began his 40-year stay in the Ecuadorian embassy.
History is capricious about what it preserves and what it consigns to its dustbin. Some years – 1712, for example – are remembered for barely anything. (Try it, if you run out of party games.) We can speculate all Christmas about which events of 2012 will echo through the ages, but your guess is as good as ours; which is why, in this Review of the Year issue, we don't attempt to distinguish between events that changed the world and those that simply changed the moment.
Like every year, this one has been exhilarating in its complexity. From politics to the press, fashion to foreign affairs, royalty to the environment – every category has produced contradictory messages. (Was it the great British drought that defined our environmental year, or the great British floods, or the great British freeze?) Over the next 22 pages, our specialist writers look back on the moments that meant most to them, under 14 headings. (The arts, and sport, have their own supplement.)
The overall theme is 'the long and short of it' – with each topic accompanied by a memorable image and the tweets that sometimes capture, best of all, the spirit of a particular event.
What you make of it all is up to you. What history makes of it remains to be seen. But we can make one pronouncement about the significance of 2012: it was the year the world didn't end.
For decades – some say centuries – New Age enthusiasts and admirers of the ancient Mayans have held that the end of the world would take place on 21 December 2012; a belief so popular that, until recently, it was the main result thrown up by an internet search for '2012'.
At the time of going to press, however, the world hadn't ended. If you're reading this, it still hasn't.
In Politics
Roman Catholic Church very angry with Government over plans for gay marriage
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9765509/Gay-marriage-plans-are-totalitarian-says-Archbishop-of-Westminster.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9765682/Catholic-leader-accuses-Cameron-of-Orwellian-tactics-on-gay-marriage.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/gay-marriage-public-say-church-is-wrong-8431263.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/25/archbishop-attacks-david-camerons-same-sex-marriage-plans
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253043/Leader-Catholic-Church-Archbishop-Westminster-Vincent-Nichols-attacks-Governments-plans-gay-marriage-undemocratic-shambles.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9765682/Catholic-leader-accuses-Cameron-of-Orwellian-tactics-on-gay-marriage.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/gay-marriage-public-say-church-is-wrong-8431263.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/25/archbishop-attacks-david-camerons-same-sex-marriage-plans
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253043/Leader-Catholic-Church-Archbishop-Westminster-Vincent-Nichols-attacks-Governments-plans-gay-marriage-undemocratic-shambles.html
Full Transcript of Queen's Speech 2012
"This past year has been one of great celebration for many. The enthusiasm
which greeted the Diamond Jubilee was, of course, especially memorable for me
and my family.
"It was humbling that so many chose to mark the anniversary of a duty which
passed to me 60 years ago. People of all ages took the trouble to take part in
various ways and in many nations. But perhaps most striking of all was to
witness the strength of fellowship and friendship among those who had gathered
together on these occasions.
"Prince Philip and I were joined by our family on the River Thames as we paid
tribute to those who have shaped the United Kingdom's past and future as a
maritime nation, and welcomed a wonderful array of craft, large and small, from
across the Commonwealth.
"On the barges and the bridges and the banks of the river there were people
who had taken their places to cheer through the mist, undaunted by the rain.
That day there was a tremendous sense of common determination to celebrate,
triumphing over the elements.
"That same spirit was also in evidence from the moment the Olympic flame
arrived on these shores. The flame itself drew hundreds and thousands of people
on its journey around the British Isles, and was carried by every kind of
deserving individual, many nominated for their own extraordinary service.
"As London hosted a splendid summer of sport, all those who saw the
achievement and courage at the Olympic and Paralympic Games were further
inspired by the skill, dedication, training and teamwork of our athletes. In
pursuing their own sporting goals, they gave the rest of us the opportunity to
share something of the excitement and drama.
"We were reminded, too, that the success of these great festivals depended to an enormous degree upon the dedication and effort of an army of volunteers. Those public-spirited people came forward in the great tradition of all those who devote themselves to keeping others safe, supported and comforted.
"For many, Christmas is also a time for coming together. But for others, service will come first. Those serving in our armed forces, in our emergency services and in our hospitals, whose sense of duty takes them away from family and friends, will be missing those they love.
"And those who have lost loved ones may find this day especially full of memories. That's why it's important at this time of year to reach out beyond our familiar relationships to think of those who are on their own.
"At Christmas I am always struck by how the spirit of togetherness lies also at the heart of the Christmas story. A young mother and a dutiful father with their baby were joined by poor shepherds and visitors from afar. They came with their gifts to worship the Christ child. From that day on he has inspired people to commit themselves to the best interests of others.
"This is the time of year when we remember that God sent his only son 'to serve, not to be served'. He restored love and service to the centre of our lives in the person of Jesus Christ.
"It is my prayer this Christmas Day that his example and teaching will continue to bring people together to give the best of themselves in the service of others.
"The carol, In The Bleak Midwinter, ends by asking a question of all of us who know the Christmas story, of how God gave himself to us in humble service: 'What can I give him, poor as I am? If I were a shepherd, I would bring a lamb; if I were a wise man, I would do my part'. The carol gives the answer 'Yet what I can I give him - give my heart'.
"I wish you all a very happy Christmas."
"We were reminded, too, that the success of these great festivals depended to an enormous degree upon the dedication and effort of an army of volunteers. Those public-spirited people came forward in the great tradition of all those who devote themselves to keeping others safe, supported and comforted.
"For many, Christmas is also a time for coming together. But for others, service will come first. Those serving in our armed forces, in our emergency services and in our hospitals, whose sense of duty takes them away from family and friends, will be missing those they love.
"And those who have lost loved ones may find this day especially full of memories. That's why it's important at this time of year to reach out beyond our familiar relationships to think of those who are on their own.
"At Christmas I am always struck by how the spirit of togetherness lies also at the heart of the Christmas story. A young mother and a dutiful father with their baby were joined by poor shepherds and visitors from afar. They came with their gifts to worship the Christ child. From that day on he has inspired people to commit themselves to the best interests of others.
"This is the time of year when we remember that God sent his only son 'to serve, not to be served'. He restored love and service to the centre of our lives in the person of Jesus Christ.
"It is my prayer this Christmas Day that his example and teaching will continue to bring people together to give the best of themselves in the service of others.
"The carol, In The Bleak Midwinter, ends by asking a question of all of us who know the Christmas story, of how God gave himself to us in humble service: 'What can I give him, poor as I am? If I were a shepherd, I would bring a lamb; if I were a wise man, I would do my part'. The carol gives the answer 'Yet what I can I give him - give my heart'.
"I wish you all a very happy Christmas."
Monday, 24 December 2012
Bentley employees seek to re-instate the company chaplain
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2252657/Bentley-axes-company-chaplain-case-upsets-non-Christian-workers-Employees-start-campaign-reinstated.html
Bentley axes its company chaplain in case he upsets non-Christian workers: Employees start campaign to have him reinstated
Every week for ten years the Rev Francis Cooke visited the shop floor at Bentley, offering counselling and advice to the luxury car maker's workers.
But only days before Christmas he has been made redundant because the company says he might offend non-Christians.
It said there were too many religions represented among the 4,000-strong workforce at its factory to warrant a Christian chaplain.
Mr Cooke called the decision 'ridiculous' and said he spoke to workers of all faiths.
Staff have started a campaign to reinstate the vicar, who they said was an 'important figure' who had even helped one employee who had been on the brink of suicide.
Mr Cooke was directly employed by Bentley – it would pay the Diocese of Chester, which would then transfer the funds to the chaplain.
He had outside roles, but this was his only paid work.
He said: 'It is just beyond belief. The reason I have been given is that there are too many people of different faiths to warrant a Christian chaplain. Everyone thinks it is quite ridiculous. There have been no complaints against me and my position is to help people and not just those who are Christians.'
He said he had been told to leave immediately after bosses said they needed to take a 'multi-faith outlook'.
He would visit the factory in Crewe, Cheshire, once a week for six hours, and also ran Christian courses and wrote a message in the firm's newsletters. 'It is not just about offering religious services,' he said. 'I provide counselling to workers who have stresses at home such as broken marriages. I would spend a few minutes with each person which would be enough to help them feel better.
'I feel that there is something else behind this.'
Mr Cooke said there had been a change since the appointment of new personnel by German firm Volkswagen, which took over the British brand in 1998.
'There have been many new faces around recently and I noticed I was being watched when I was talking to some of the staff even if it was just for a matter of seconds or minutes. I knew something was going on and that there was trouble ahead.'
Yesterday one worker said: 'We have started a petition as we want him back. Everyone is really angry about it.'
Retired employee John Austin, 67, said: 'He was there for a lot of people. I know one individual who was feeling suicidal, but Francis turned him around.
'He was a very important man at the factory.'
A Bentley Motors spokesman said: 'We have a wide range of faiths and want to take a multi-faith outlook. It would be very difficult to have somebody from each faith.
'This now gives us the opportunity to look at this and recognise the range of faiths we have here.'
Bentley axes its company chaplain in case he upsets non-Christian workers: Employees start campaign to have him reinstated
- Rev Francis Cooke made redundant just days before Christmas
- Company says too many people of different faiths to warrant chaplain
- Mr Cooke says his role provided counselling for all not just Christians
- Staff have started petition to bring the chaplain back
But only days before Christmas he has been made redundant because the company says he might offend non-Christians.
It said there were too many religions represented among the 4,000-strong workforce at its factory to warrant a Christian chaplain.
Mr Cooke called the decision 'ridiculous' and said he spoke to workers of all faiths.
Staff have started a campaign to reinstate the vicar, who they said was an 'important figure' who had even helped one employee who had been on the brink of suicide.
Mr Cooke was directly employed by Bentley – it would pay the Diocese of Chester, which would then transfer the funds to the chaplain.
He had outside roles, but this was his only paid work.
He said: 'It is just beyond belief. The reason I have been given is that there are too many people of different faiths to warrant a Christian chaplain. Everyone thinks it is quite ridiculous. There have been no complaints against me and my position is to help people and not just those who are Christians.'
He said he had been told to leave immediately after bosses said they needed to take a 'multi-faith outlook'.
He would visit the factory in Crewe, Cheshire, once a week for six hours, and also ran Christian courses and wrote a message in the firm's newsletters. 'It is not just about offering religious services,' he said. 'I provide counselling to workers who have stresses at home such as broken marriages. I would spend a few minutes with each person which would be enough to help them feel better.
'I feel that there is something else behind this.'
Mr Cooke said there had been a change since the appointment of new personnel by German firm Volkswagen, which took over the British brand in 1998.
'There have been many new faces around recently and I noticed I was being watched when I was talking to some of the staff even if it was just for a matter of seconds or minutes. I knew something was going on and that there was trouble ahead.'
Yesterday one worker said: 'We have started a petition as we want him back. Everyone is really angry about it.'
Retired employee John Austin, 67, said: 'He was there for a lot of people. I know one individual who was feeling suicidal, but Francis turned him around.
'He was a very important man at the factory.'
A Bentley Motors spokesman said: 'We have a wide range of faiths and want to take a multi-faith outlook. It would be very difficult to have somebody from each faith.
'This now gives us the opportunity to look at this and recognise the range of faiths we have here.'
PM tries to appease Christians; actually he is beguiling them
"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of
thistles?" Matthew 7:16
Even Satan quoted the Bible to Jesus when he was tempted.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2252685/PMs-Christmas-bid-calm-Christian-anger-gay-marriage-David-Cameron-quotes-Gospel-St-John-annual-message.html
Even Satan quoted the Bible to Jesus when he was tempted.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2252685/PMs-Christmas-bid-calm-Christian-anger-gay-marriage-David-Cameron-quotes-Gospel-St-John-annual-message.html
How divide and rule is potentially being used via our internet use
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/9761852/Personalised-pricing-driving-prices-down.html
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has recently launched a ‘call for information’ on
online personalised pricing. Personalised pricing is the use of data
relating to a specific user (purchase history, browsing history, demographic,
hardware, operating system, etc) to deliver a bespoke price offering.
This data could come from a retailer’s own database, be enhanced by third
party data or be data offered up by the user’s computer/tablet/phone (including
via cookies).
This is the second time the OFT has turned its attention to online
personalisation. In May 2010 it published its Online Targeting of Advertising
and Prices report, where it said that it could find no evidence of wrongdoing on
the part of the market, but said it would keep a watching brief as technology
developed. This report was originally triggered by suspicions about online
advertising targeted by browsing behaviour – which has in fact become the norm
today, despite consumers original reservations. Indeed, there is now some
anecdotal evidence to suggest that consumers would rather see relevant adverts
than ‘spam’ adverts.
The concern of the OFT in launching its call for information is a suspicion
that these types of personalisation technology are somehow being used to
hoodwink consumers into spending more money – the question asked by the OFT is
“if this is harmful, where are the boundaries of acceptable conduct, and is
consumer protection legislation being breached”?
Notwithstanding that tone of suspicion, the OFT admits that it does not have
any evidence that retailers are doing this, but says “we are aware that there is
a lot of concern about this practice”.
As with most new uses of technology, a knee-jerk reaction seems to be that
the technology is bad. If we look at this in context, retail is a very
competitive business – consumers are empowered, know their rights and have
access to information to make price comparisons. So it would be an ill-advised
retailer who deployed personalisation technology to materially drive up prices.
That retailer would very soon find themselves with fewer customers.
On the contrary, let’s look at how pricing personalisation can really drive sales. For example, if I wanted to buy a new television I could either do the research myself (via retailers’ websites) or I could use one of the many well known price comparison sites. If I wanted to go even further, I could look into research by Which? All of this would give me a good idea of the price for the television without even visiting a shop.
Now imagine that one of the websites I have visited to research the price of the television had actually deployed personalised pricing. That retailer would have sufficient data to enable it to make me a discount offer I might accept – the offer that brought it below the prices being shown on the various other sites I have looked at for research purposes. The offer that actually achieves the sale, rather than no sale.
So rather than this technology driving prices up, the more obvious use of personalised pricing is personalised discounting. (But that doesn’t sound so controversial, does it?)
This type of personalised discounting is, after all, what many retailers’ loyalty schemes are all about – what we have with online personalised pricing is that kind of data but enhanced with external information. It also works for customers not enrolled in loyalty schemes.
Remember too that there is also no obligation on a retailer to charge the same price for everyone. A jar of Marmite will cost significantly more in the premium food store than in a local supermarket. Why? Because the customer base is different, based on data around regional demographics. Online personalised pricing is no different – it is merely hyper regionalisation, to a region of one person.
But of course, there is one key difference. Standing in the premium food store (or the local supermarket) I cannot easily make a choice between the two – if I want Marmite at that precise moment, I have only one choice of seller. Online purchasers are not so constrained and can easily divert to any number of other sites to make a purchase. And that’s the reason why personalised pricing is more likely than not to drive prices down rather than up.
Of course, as in the bricks and mortar retail world, there will be anomalies and sharp practices. We cannot avoid this – but let’s not judge something as suspicious, just because of that.
I predict that this will boil down to transparency. We already have all the right laws in place to do this: the Data Protection Act and its quiver of regulations already ensure that retailers must be transparent about how personal data is obtained and used.
On the contrary, let’s look at how pricing personalisation can really drive sales. For example, if I wanted to buy a new television I could either do the research myself (via retailers’ websites) or I could use one of the many well known price comparison sites. If I wanted to go even further, I could look into research by Which? All of this would give me a good idea of the price for the television without even visiting a shop.
Now imagine that one of the websites I have visited to research the price of the television had actually deployed personalised pricing. That retailer would have sufficient data to enable it to make me a discount offer I might accept – the offer that brought it below the prices being shown on the various other sites I have looked at for research purposes. The offer that actually achieves the sale, rather than no sale.
So rather than this technology driving prices up, the more obvious use of personalised pricing is personalised discounting. (But that doesn’t sound so controversial, does it?)
This type of personalised discounting is, after all, what many retailers’ loyalty schemes are all about – what we have with online personalised pricing is that kind of data but enhanced with external information. It also works for customers not enrolled in loyalty schemes.
Remember too that there is also no obligation on a retailer to charge the same price for everyone. A jar of Marmite will cost significantly more in the premium food store than in a local supermarket. Why? Because the customer base is different, based on data around regional demographics. Online personalised pricing is no different – it is merely hyper regionalisation, to a region of one person.
But of course, there is one key difference. Standing in the premium food store (or the local supermarket) I cannot easily make a choice between the two – if I want Marmite at that precise moment, I have only one choice of seller. Online purchasers are not so constrained and can easily divert to any number of other sites to make a purchase. And that’s the reason why personalised pricing is more likely than not to drive prices down rather than up.
Of course, as in the bricks and mortar retail world, there will be anomalies and sharp practices. We cannot avoid this – but let’s not judge something as suspicious, just because of that.
I predict that this will boil down to transparency. We already have all the right laws in place to do this: the Data Protection Act and its quiver of regulations already ensure that retailers must be transparent about how personal data is obtained and used.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)