Category Archives: current affairs

current affairs, ramblings

Get out of jail free?

Now here’s a fascinating idea to play with …

The UK could be handed a “Get out of jail free” card by the Scots.

A senior Scots constitutional lawyer has suggested that “Scottish independence could see the UK kicked out of the European Union”.

Rejoining would then require a new referendum (which would likely be lost?) and if we did rejoin we’d likely lose our huge EU payments discount.

One can hope that the Scots might do us a favour, but I suspect the EU would fudge things so they didn’t … so we’ll still need an acrobatic display of pig avionics as well.

Heresy Corner has a fuller report on the speculations.

current affairs

Whither Now?

I just can’t help feeling we’re living in interesting times. And this last weekend could go down as a tipping point.

France and Germany have stitched up a deal on the Euro financial crisis created by countries living beyond their means. The deal involved banks lending countries even more money to pay for the debts they already couldn’t afford.

Britain and the US have bailed out banks who racked up debts by lending money they didn’t have to people to live beyond their means. Having engendered a debt crisis those same banks are now being berated for not lending people even more money.

But this weekend the French people have said a resounding “Non” and elected an anti-deal, Socialist, President and given the incumbent a bloody nose. The new President basically wants to tear up the deals.

The Greek people, in a parliamentary election, have effectively thrown out the coalition which agreed to their country’s bailout. There will either be a new anti-deal coalition or new elections.

The Irish are tiptoeing towards at least trying to tear up the deals.

And the Italians are expressing discontent with the stitched up deal in their local elections.

Meanwhile …

Britain is again in recession — I personally doubt we were ever out of it — and if you look at the data this is a much longer and deeper (double dip) recession than those of the mid-70s, early-80s or early-90s. (The mid-70s recession felt pretty bad, so heaven knows where this one will end up.)

Shareholders at UK insurance giant Aviva have rejected the boss’s bonuses leading to the resignation of the CEO. Other shareholder revolts look to be on the cards.

The value of the Euro has fallen against the Pound; you can now get at least €1.20 to the Pound.

All the markets are sharply down on the day largely due to the uncertainty in Greece and the rest of Europe. One thing the markets hate is uncertainty.

And of course Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, is behaving like a petulant child and throwing her toys out of her pram to try to blame and bully everyone, because her chickens are coming home to roost and her knicker elastic has perished.

It’s a harsh reality, but all of this could probably have been avoided if (a) the rigid structure of the Euro had been stillborn, (b) the regulations on budget deficits in the European Treaties (and they were there regardless of the Euro regulations) had been adhered to and (c) a few banks had been allowed to fail because of their bad debts.

What of this could not have been foreseen?

Who said we don’t live in interesting times?!

current affairs

Vote Lizard

So today is the four-yearly London mayoral voting jamboree. Whoopee! Vote for the lizard of your choice! Or not! Maybe!

Nevertheless we have just returned from doing our civic duty for the year.

And what a farce it is!

I don’t mind walking round to the local scout hut, which has been our local Polling Station for some years. Or the local school (which was used before they started using the scout hut when the school was rebuilt). Or the church hall. What I mind about is the daftness of the voting system.

We are voting for (a) the Mayor, (b) a constituency member of the London Assembly and (c) party list members of the same Assembly.

The Mayoral vote is easy. You have a first choice vote and a second choice vote. If, when the votes are counted, the first choice votes give anyone over 50% they’re elected. If not, all but the top two are eliminated and the second choice votes of those eliminated are (re)distributed. The one with the most votes then wins. It’s a sort of buggered up Single Transferable Vote system. I don’t have a problem with this; I’d prefer STV but that’s too hard for Joe Public (it taxed the brains of students when I was an undergraduate!).

The London Assembly however is different; and in my view a shambles. There are just 25 Assembly members. That’s less than one for each of the 33 London Boroughs and one for roughly every three of London’s 73 parliamentary constituencies. That’s leaving aside the fact the the Assembly has no real power: what the Mayor wants done, gets done.

First one has a single vote for a (named) constituency member. There are 14 constituencies, where “constituency” means two or three London Boroughs. What sort of constituency is that!? It is the equivalent of dozens of local councillors and some five or so parliamentary constituencies. As such the Assembly constituencies are so big as to be meaningless.

Lastly there is the party list. Here you vote for which of the list (of about a dozen) parties you like; you have one vote. Eleven party members are elected to the Assembly from a prioritised list provided by each party for the whole of London. Seats are allocated to parties pro rata to the number of votes received, with any party getting 5% or more of the votes guaranteed seat(s).

All three of these ballots are counted separately, so that’s three A4-sized ballot papers in different pretty colours all of which go in the same ballot box.

I agree with having an elected Mayor for London and a London Assembly. But in God’s name who thought up this shambolic way of doing it?

In my view the Assembly (or whatever you want to call it) has to have some teeth to actually control the Mayor’s possible excesses. And it has to have a sensible number of members elected directly to represent people; that probably means a member for each parliamentary constituency perhaps arranged as two or three “members” per Borough. And the voting system needs to be simple: “first past the post” will do, but STV would be better.

Whether Londoners — well at least the small number who bother to vote — return the current Mayor, Boris Johnson (Conservative), for another term or re-elect the previous Mayor, Ken “the Newt” Livingstone (Labour), remains to be seen. It is very unlikely to be any one of the other five candidates. We’ll probably know sometime tomorrow. It’ll be close.

current affairs, environment, medical, science

Fukushima Reprise

4 Comments

There’s so much going on at the moment that I should be writing about that I’m having a hard time keeping up! Anyway here’s the next piece.

There was an interesting, and I suggest important, “Opinion” article in last week’s New Scientist (dated 17 March 2012). In it Don Higson, a fellow of the Australasian Radiation Protection Society, argues for the total revision scale on which nuclear accidents are measured and points up the lack of true comparison between Fukushima and Chernobyl. Along the way he highlights the major differences between the two in health effects, adding some further important perspective on the situation.

The article itself is behind a paywall, so I hope I’ll be forgiven for reproducing some factual highlights here.

Everybody who gets cancer in Japan over the next 40 years will no doubt blame their misfortune on radiation from Fukushima Daiichi […] This would be entirely understandable but will have no basis in science […]

[T]here is no possibility that the physical health consequences of Fukushima Daiichi will be anywhere near as bad as those of Chernobyl.

As far as anyone knows, no member of the public received a significant dose of radiation attributable to the Fukushima Daiichi reactor emergency […]

Chernobyl was the worst that could happen. Safety and protection systems failed and there was a full core meltdown in a reactor that had no containment […]

237 Chernobyl workers were taken to hospital with suspected acute radiation sickness; 134 of these cases were confirmed; 28 were fatal; about 20 other workers have since died from illnesses considered to have been caused or aggravated by radiation exposure […]

On top of that, it has been estimated that about 4000 people will die […] from radiation-induced cancer […]

At Fukushima Daiichi, the reactors shut down safely when struck by the magnitude-9 Tohoku earthquake […] problems arose after they were inundated by a much larger tsunami than had been anticipated when the nuclear plant was designed […] The reactor containments were partially effective […]

There were no deaths attributable to radiation. Two workers received burns from beta radiation. They were discharged from hospital after two days. Two workers incurred high internal radiation exposure from inhaling iodine-131, which gives them a significant risk of developing thyroid cancer.

Doses incurred by about 100 other workers have been high enough to cause a small risk of developing cancer after 20 or more years […] About 25 per cent of the population dies from cancer whether accidentally exposed to radiation or not. This rate might be increased by an additional one or two per cent among the exposed workers […]

[T]here have been no radiation injuries to children or to other members of the public […]

[T]he amount of iodine-131 escaping from all the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi was less than 10 per cent of the amount released at Chernobyl, and the release of caesium-137, the next most important fission product, was less than 15 per cent of the Chernobyl total […]

As I’ve said before, we need to keep this in perspective.

While there are clearly many, many lessons to be learnt Fukushima should be looked on as a success story in terms of reactor design. Yes there were shortcomings in the design of the resilience, the fall-back ability, the processes and the communications. And there have been massive knock-on effects on the population and the environment — and indeed it has been argued the worst of the health effects will be the devastating mental stresses on the Japanese people (see, inter alia, this Guardian report).

But given that those reactors are 40-ish years old, and that even before March 2011 we knew a lot better how to design safe and secure reactors, this should be viewed as a (limited) success story.

beliefs, current affairs, ramblings

Marriage

There’s recently been a lot of brouhaha over the UK government’s suggestion of making marriage available to (male and female) homosexual couples.

The Christian churches are up in arms because they see it as devaluing (or worse) the sacrament of marriage.

Put plainly, this is bollox.

Neither the church, nor any other religion, owns marriage. Arguably it may have done once, in the days before developed civil government, but no longer. In almost every civilised country there is a civil marriage option available as well as a religious one. The churches may have a ceremony which they call marriage. This does not mean they own the concept or the sole rights, although it does give them the right to choose who to allow to partake in their ceremony.

A heterosexual couple can have a civil marriage, so why can’t a homosexual couple? No-one is suggesting that the churches have to be a part of this if they wish not to. They are not to be obliged to marry homosexual couples and indeed they may choose (as they do now) who can marry under their aegis. Many heterosexual couples are denied a religious marriage for a whole variety of reasons.

And of course no couple has to marry or enter into any officially sanctioned partnership arrangement. And quite right too. So a coach and horses has already been driven through marraige as originally conceived by the churches.

I fail to see a problem.

There are couples who will choose a civil marriage and couples who will choose a religious marriage. Civil marriage will be available to all; religious marriage will only be available to those who can jump some arbitrary set of church defined hurdles. Just as now.

And come couples will choose to ignore the whole idea of marriage (by whatever name) and just live together. Horses for courses, and all that.

No change, really, except that the civil marriage net is being widened.

Although there is the suggestion of an anomaly with civil partnerships. As gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has pointed out the current proposals now discriminate against heterosexuals by allowing same-sex couples the option of marriage or civil partnerships but only marriage for heterosexual couples. Which is ludicrous!

I see no purpose in continuing with the civil partnership sham. Let’s drop it altogether and have just civil marriages. Either that or we have to keep both civil partnerships and civil marriages for all.

Or of course we could just ban marriage altogether — for everyone.

For other sane views you might like to read Betty Herbert’s blog, John Bingham in the Daily Telegraph and Marie Jackson on BBC News.

current affairs, links, ramblings

So You Missed … ?

More links to things you may have missed. Let’s start with some important items I should write whole blog posts about but just can’t stomach today.

Like I commented on Facebook, this first isn’t just wrong, or bizarre, or cruel, it’s obscene (and that’s not a word I use lightly or often). Georgia Rep Wants To Force Women To Carry Stillborn Fetuses … Like Cows Do. Maybe these loonies should be made to wear a stinking albatross round their necks. As has been said elsewhere if men had to endure half the things they impose on women better ways would soon be found, or minds changed. What price Christian charity? Again! Seethe!

Next, here’s an interesting alternative take on the validity (or not) of modern Christian claims of persecution. As it’s from the National Secular Society it’s probably as biased in the opposite direction! Caveat emptor!

Both of which remind me of this cartoon …

And while we’re on the church, let’s have an interesting sideways look from Friday’s FT, which shows just how bizarre is the Cathodic church’s attitude to gay marriage.

And here’s a worrying judgement handed down by the European Court of Human Rights, supporting the UK courts’ decisions, which appears to give the police carte blanche to do almost anything they like on the streets to restrict liberty, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association. Very, very worrying.

And a final rant for today … this confirms what I maintained the other day that water companies are losing vast amounts of their water through leaks — possibly as much as 25%!

So now for an interesting piece of science. Apparently your soul is in your eyeballs. Yes really. Well actually it does make sense and does seem to agree with one’s intuitive experience.

So how do we think about nothing? This gives two totally different approaches.

And finally something rather splendid: an old church converted into a modern bookstore.

It takes the Dutch to find some good in Christianity. 🙂

current affairs, ramblings

Crossings Out

So the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Dr Rowan Williams, is standing down in nine months time. Appropriate timing? Is he being transmogrified into the Virgin Mary?

Meanwhile he has plenty of time to come out with a few more inanities.

Today, the day that he announced his pregnancy capitulation, he has said that wearing the cross does not offend non-Christians.

How can he possibly know? He isn’t a non-Christian.

Oh! Maybe he is! After all he’s Archbishop of Canterbury. It’s well known that Archbishops of Canterbury can believe six impossible things before breakfast. Recall too that memorable line from the Eric Idle version of the “List Song” in the ENO production of The Mikado:

Bishops who don’t believe in God
Chief Constables who do.

Full lyric here (complete with a couple of errors) and a video on YouTube (the list Song starts about 4m15s in).

current affairs, environment

Hobby-Horse News

Oh God, it’s a hobby horse news day! Not content with creating a brouhaha over Susanna Reid’s cleavage there are two other news stories at the moment which are guaranteed to wind up the clockwork in my hobby-horse.

First of all there’s the report that Daylight Saving Time (aka. Summer Time) may well be bad for you.

Apparently putting the clocks forward an hour plays havoc with our body clocks and circadian cycles.

Well yes, of course it does. Haven’t you ever noticed?

Apparently this may be a contributing factor to an increase in heart attacks following the Spring clock change.

I wonder why I keep saying that we should abandon Summer Time and keep GMT the year round.

The majority of the global population doesn’t keep Summer Time (see the map here), so why do we need to? People increasingly work flexibly these days, so it shouldn’t matter that, within broad zones, we all have a clock which says noon when the sun is directly overhead (as GMT defines for the UK).

Secondly, we’re told that SE England is running out of water and that the water companies are about to impose hosepipe bans.

I don’t see why this should come as a surprise. Yes, we’ve had a couple of dry winters. But we also use excessive amounts of water.

Many years ago we were advised by our masters that we should shower rather than bath because it uses less water. This, however, created two problems which clearly weren’t foreseen. (A) that people would have more powerful showers, and spend more time in the shower, so they often use just as much water per shower as they for a bath. And (B) that people will shower every day; some even several times a day.

Neither is necessary, unless one is doing a really dirty job. And frankly most of us aren’t.

Back in the good old days we used to bath once or twice a week, or if we fell in the duck pond. Which was fine as long as we had a decent wash every day. The majority of jobs, and our environment, are now a lot less dirty than they were. So why do we need to shower every day?

Answer: We don’t. A good daily wash with a shower a couple of times a week is fine. This is what I do and I don’t think all my friends are too polite to tell me I smell.

That though is only part of the water problem. We flush too much water down our toilets unnecessarily. Loos do not need flushing after every pee. Or if they do, a quick 1-2 litres is enough, not the 4 litres even most modern dual flush cisterns provide. I also get incensed when I see people hosing down their houses or washing the car and leaving the hose running water away down the gutter while they polish and buff.

But the water companies are not blameless. We know many water companies are struggling with old Victorian water mains and sewers. But they really do need to do more to stem burst mains as soon as they appear and not leave them running water to waste for days, weeks or even months. Not only would this save loads of water but it must also save money in the long run.

Meanwhile, yes, let’s have a hosepipe ban and let’s have it properly enforced. Then let’s install water meters on every property. It seems the only thing that Joe Public understands is being hurt in the pocket.

Now remind me why most of us live in the driest quarter of the country? Oh, maybe it’s something to do with sun and warmth? But then again, maybe not; after all this is England!

beliefs, current affairs

Logic? What Logic?

2 Comments

Reports and comment on two recent pieces of appalling logic.

Firstly on the Roman Catholic Church’s stance on same sex marriage: Cardinal Sins against Logic. What can one do but agree with one commenter who says There is no such thing as ‘a great theological mind’. The term is an oxymoron.

And secondly on the attitude of some American mothers towards other teenage girls taking the Pill: All Kinds of Weapons.

Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!

current affairs

Not Even Wrong

Various newsfeeds (eg. here) this morning are reporting that the Archbishop of Canterbury has said he believes the law has no right to legalise same-sex marriage.

While the reverend Archbishop has every right to believe whatever the hell idiotic notions he likes — well he believes in God, Hell and the Resurrection, so why stop there — he is factually wrong about the law.

“The law” is a civil process, enacted by the government of the day on our behalf. It is not an adjunct of the Church. Therefore the government of the day has every right to legislate for whatever it likes — save only for the approval of parliament, international law and a major peoples’ revolution.

Who taught the reverend gentleman politics and constitutional history?

(By the way, look at the photo, he’s even already growing Devil’s horns from his eyebrows!)