Take Back Power

Any regular readers might note that I have resisted the urge to weigh-in on MP's Expenses. There are a couple of reasons for this. Firstly, I'm not sure that there is anything further to add to the debate and secondly when it's all you hear on the news and read in the paper this sort of thing very quickly becomes quite boring. However, there is one point I feel really needs to be made.

Over the last few weeks it has been made clear to the public that a number of MPs have been on the make, exploiting the expenses system to work to their benefit. Some MPs have treated their allowances like a target to be reached, claiming tens of thousands of pounds of money from UK plc. The minimum that an MP will receive as an annual salary is over £64,000. They will earn even more than this if they are on a committee or if they have a seat on the cabinet. Expenses are then paid on top of all this which means that an MP can earn very much more than their basic salary while average earnings in the UK are less than £25,000. With a high proportion of people earning very much less than this it's no wonder that the public are so infuriated

However, it is also important to remember that out of 646 MPs in UK Parliament, the Telegraph have named only 169 (which includes some MPs that no longer hold a seat in Parliament). This means that there are still well over 400 MPs that have not been singled out - probably because any expenses claims that they have made are entirely appropriate and unremarkable. It is also worth remembering that of the 169 named MPs, very few have actually broken the expenses rules. I'm not saying that it's morally acceptable but I am saying that it is understandable. Don't agree? Let me put it to you like this:

You start working for a new company and are told that you can claim expenses for certain items that enable you to do your job - fuel and stationary perhaps. To begin with you claim only for those items that you purchase that are related to you carrying out your duties until... one day, chatting with a couple of your colleagues they point out all the things that you can claim for, and indeed, lots of other employees already claim for. So your choice is this: do you continue to claim only expenses relating to your job or do you start to claim everything you can? Some paper here, staples there, a bit more fuel that you actually used for work... it's not right and I'm certainly not condoning it, but it happens and thousands of people do it and get away with it.

Of course, they aren't claiming £30,000 for gardening with £1600 of that for a 'duck island'!

Essentially, the point I'm making here is that people can be relied on to behave like people, not angels. At the end of the day, many people enter politics on a truly alturistic basis. They want to make a difference and they want that difference to be positive. However, we can only rely on people to behave like people and people lie, they steal, they cheat and they look after number 1. We can't count on anyone (including ourselves) to be whiter than white but that's what rules and laws are made for; to discourage us from doing things we ought not to. The same goes for the government. There are more than a hundred MPs that have made ridiculous expenses claims, but they have been able to do so because the rules are not good enough and they have been able to get away with it because the oversight is not tough enough.

That's why I am supporting the Liberal Democrat Take Back Power campaign. The people of the UK need a government that works for us, not for the financial gain of its members. We need proper oversight and we need proper representation. Labour have proposed no serious changes to the rules - they would like the status quo to remain so that they can keep their fingers firmly in the cookie jar. The Conservatives have proposed only the very weakest of reforms that will make no real difference to the people of this country.

The Liberal Democrats' Take Back Power campaign aims to reform the expenses system in full, ensure the public have the right to sack any MP that has been suspended for misconduct, reform the outdated House of Lords, reform party funding so that the government can't be 'bought' through party donations, introduce fixed term Parliaments, reform the electoral system so that each vote really does count and change procedure to reduce executive power. More detailed information can be found at http://www.takebackpower.org/.

It is important that we take the opportunity NOW to press for true electoral reform rather than letting the government get away with a continued abuse of power. Therefore, I urge everyone to take a stand and sign the online petition. It's time to make our voice heard.

Bank Holidays Are Made for Moby

Ever have one of those perfect moments where you think 'yeah, that's what it's all about'?

It's bank holiday Monday, the sun is shining and it's almost uncomfortably warm (for once). There are kids walking down the street with footballs and riding bikes, families heading out for the afternoon and hardly any cars about. I've just finished a long, hard slog on my last Open University assignment for this year (only two weeks late... oops!) and Moby is playing on iTunes. But not just any Moby, the original and best album: Play; the one from which every track has been used either in a movie, a TV series or an advertisement. Yes, this album is just that good. The music from The Beach came from this album and so did that awesome track that plays at the end of the Bourne movies.
So apart from the bloke over the road that is rather noisely jet-washing the patio furniture and their kids' outdoor toys, it was one of those perfect moments. But we'll forgive him for his ceaseless whirring and spraying noises for now because we're in a really good mood.

A Reversal of 200 Years of 'Progress'

It's been a busy couple of weeks with a number of highs and not-so-highs.

Of the highs, the rehearsals for the Sing Live concert at the end of June are coming along nicely. Even the stress of a horrific day this Wednesday, when a simple airport pickup turned into a three hour nightmare, was very quickly eased by a few bars of 'It Had to be You'. My piano lessons are coming along similarly well - although I wish it was as easy to make my fingers move as fast as my mouth! Finally, Charly, survived a full service with no problems - what a relief!

In the not-so-highs category the top of the tree has to be the Irwell Riverside by-election. In case anyone has missed it, husband Steve was selected as the Lib Dem candidate. You can catch up on the events of the campaign on his own blog.

Being involved in his campaign - including helping to develop (or rather hone) the content of his leaflets and then 'on the frontline' posting those leaflets through the doors of the ward - has been a great experience. Watching the opening of the postal ballots was fascinating (I finally understand the need for all the bits of paper and those multi-coloured envelopes) while actually being able to attend the count in the evening was truly unique: not only because the media were circling like vultures awaiting the inevitable arrival of local political pariah, Hazel Blears, but also because so few 'ordinary' people get to see democracy up close and personal like this. In the end Steve came second behind the Labour candidate, Matt Mold.

All in all, it was a pretty positive result for the Lib Dems. This ward has traditionally been a Labour stronghold - last year they took a 51% share of the vote - so we were really taking the fight to them on their own territory. Steve attracted 18% of the vote (a reduction of only 1%) while the Conservatives and Labour lost out by 4% and 13% respectively. The recent Expenses Scandal has clearly taken its toll. It isn't just Labour that is paying the political price for the government's failure to set its house in order: every one of the major parties lost ground to the fringe parties (The Greens, UKIP and BNP all fielded candidates). Although we obviously hoped for better, given the circumstances losing only 1% share is an achievement.

So clearly I'm not disappointed with the result for the Lib Dems, so why am I not happy? There are two elements of the result that are extremely disappointing: The BNP and the voter turnout.

Until this by-election I have had few encounters with the BNP. I've been aware of them, of course, and will freely admit that I have always held a pretty low opinion of them as a political entity. However, it is not until I actually came face to face with them that I realised just how vile, deceitful and disrespectful they really are. Without going into a raft of detail (which would take me all day to catalogue) I was astonished by the sheer volume of lies and half-truths that they spouted in their propaganda and online on their own websites and particularly on those of others. Worryingly, they also showed absolutely no respect for democracy, even going as far as to suggest that some people should not be allowed to vote. If it's possible, they showed even less respect for the voting public talking openly in a highly derogatory manner referring to the voters as 'stupid', 'thick' or 'sheep' just because they didn't vote BNP. Finally, (and I speak from personal experience) they are downright nasty. Ignoring the disgusting abuse that their cohorts posted in comments on many local blogs, their behaviour at the evening count was akin to the level of school playground bullies. They were both puerile and venomous to other people present at the count as well as the returning officer. It is not just me that has noticed: Leader of the local Labour party, John Merry, has commented on Steve Cooke's blog.

However what disappoints me is not the BNP members or the party as a whole - I would expect little else from an organisation that has its roots firmly embedded in the fascist British National Front - it's the fact that the people of Salford appear to be falling for their rubbish. I don't mind if you choose to vote BNP as long as you understand who and what you are voting for (that is your choice and your right!) but I'm concerned that many voters may not be looking beyond the glossy surface of the BNPs leaflets or beyond their diverting but deceptive propaganda stunts. For goodness sake, if you are considering voting BNP in any election, please please please, make sure you are fully informed. A simple search in google or on reputable websites such as the BBC should reveal why so many people are set against their organisation.

However, no matter what my personal feelings about the BNP (or the mafia that they sent to the count) happen to be, the far greater disappointment in this by-election was the turnout. Only 17.5% of those people who are registered to vote in Irwell Riverside actually went to the trouble of doing so - that's less than 1 in 7 people! As a result, a little over 600 people chose the councillor for a ward of more than 9000 registered voters: that's less than 7% of people in the ward choosing who dictates the policies that directly influence the lives of everyone else. This kind of apathy means that decisions are made by a tiny minority of voters and it also opens the door to the fringe parties making extremely limited public support seem much greater than it actually is. This is not democracy! I'm sure that there are many people who didn't vote that would say 'my vote doesn't count' or 'I don't know who to vote for' or 'nothing will change so what's the point' or any number of similar excuses but the fact is by choosing to not vote you willingly reverse almost 200 years of progress.

Less than two centuries ago only 1 in 7 men could vote. Just 125 years ago less than half of all men could vote and women didn't have any voting rights at all. It wasn't until 1918 - less than a century ago - that any woman could vote in this country and it was only 81 years ago that we achieved universal suffrage. Two world wars were fought to maintain our sovereignty and democracy. Even now there are thousands of British troops protecting our democratic rights against terrorists who would like to see their religious and political views forced upon us, and all around the world their are millions of people that still have either no voting rights or can't vote freely.

Therefore, to those residents of Irwell Riverside who did not vote in this election my question is this: what response could you possibly give me that would justify allowing less than 7% of your community to make this choice for all of you?

Charly Charly

Sad news.... my poor little beaten up motor, named 'Charly Charly' after the last two letters of her reg number, has suffered a severe battering this evening at the hands of mindless thugs. The little bar-stewards smashed the front driver's side and passenger side windows and the rear windscreen in an effort to make off with my valuables. Fortunately I am not daft enough to leave anything of worth in my car so they got away with only a couple of bags for life, a bottle of water and my sunglasses (worth about £20). They did lift my work security pass, OU course book and my music score for the upcoming concert at the Bridgewater Hall this June, but a local resident spotted the culprits dump the stuff at the top of the car park and returned it to me safe and sound.

It all happened this evening in the visitors' car park at the Royal Apartments while I was having my piano lesson. The apartments are a stone's throw (or perhaps a brick's throw) from Encombe Place, the current site of the Salford Youth Offenders Service. This office is currently the subject of a hotly contested restricted document that has found its way into the hands of local residents in the Blackfriars area of Salford - where the council proposes to resite the Youth Offenders Service office. I understand that the document notes that within a half-mile radius of the YOS office there is a significant hotspot of crime - particularly opportunist crime like theft from a vehicle. Local Labour councillors are trying to suppress the document as it is a clear indicator that such a service should not be sited in a residential area. They have even tried to skew the figures (reported in the Manchester Evening News tonight) by saying that these crimes are the fault of vehicle owners for not carrying out basic security. I would like to ask Councillor Lancaster if I deserved to have three windows smashed in my car for the sake of a bottle of water and some books?

Fortunately, the fateful tale of Charly Charly has a happy ending. Thanks to the angels of Autoglass who came out at midnight, my car will be fixed and returned to me in a matter of hours. In the meantime I remain grateful to the two separate residents of the Royal Apartments that witnessed the crime and reported it to the police. Also a big thank you to the police that attended the scene - they were friendly, helpful and professional. And finally a huge thanks to hubby Steve for fetching me a dustpan and brush and doing all the ringing round and fetching and carrying for me. Because of him I was still able to make it to a very successful rehersal for the June concert. Yippee!

What Does Gordon Brown Eat?

Barack Obama has been pap-snapped popping out for a burger - something he can pull off because he's pretty much the most powerful man in politics and can do whatever the hell he likes, but also because his charm and easy-going nature makes it seem perfectly normal. Meanwhile, Gordon Brown couldn't be less normal or more distant from the public. His attempts at YouTube are forced (just like his smile) and he it seems he has been pap-snapped too... standing in front of a Nazi Swastika (apparently taken in a school he was standing in front of a WWII display about Nazi Germany).

So Barack Obama is normal and eats burgers. Gordon Brown is clearly an alien (I wonder if he has the right to live and work on our planet) so what does he eat????

ID Please...

On the news this morning, I discovered that Manchester will be the trial city for the government's hair-brained ID Card scheme. What joy!

Identity cards will cost anywhere between £30 and £60 and, according to Jacqui Smith, will 'increase protection' against crime, illegal immigrants and terrorists. The Home Office press release claims the benefits of ID Cards as:

• a universal and simple proof of identity that brings convenience for organisations and individuals –ending the disorganised use of photocopied bank statements, phone bills and birth certificates;
• control over who can see your personal details – this means no longer revealing details about your finances or personal life just to prove who you are and where you live;
• ensuring that foreign nationals living, working and studying here legally are able to easily prove their identity and preventing those here illegally from benefiting from the privileges of Britain;
• and convenient travel in Europe using the identity card.

Seems great, doesn't it... until you start to really think about it.

Just like any form of identification, it will be possible to clone and forge these cards. They will be stolen and they will be lost. No security system is completely unhackable - a truth that has been repeatedly reasserted, most recently with the banks' certainty that 'Chip & Pin' and 'Verify by Visa/Mastercard Secure Code' would reduce credit card fraud instances of which continue to increase. It might make it more difficult for forgers and fraudsters, illegal immigrants and terrorists - for about five minutes - but like Star Trek's 'Borg', they will adapt and if we rest too much faith in such a system I fear that we will ultimately leave ourselves and our nation fatally exposed.

As for the so-called benefits of the scheme, I keep wondering if the Home Office is trying to be funny. We already have two major forms of identity in this country - the passport and the driving licence. Both of which we have to pay (through the nose) for every time we need to renew or change the details. The passport now contains biometric information and the driving licence has your address on it. Why do we need a further proof of identity? (Which we would also have to pay (through the nose) for every time the details needed to be changed). Convenience and 'control' of my information are paltry reasons to introduce a scheme as such massive cost. I will still have to have a driving licence in order to drive and I will still need to have a passport for travel outside Europe, so why is having extra ID considered to be convenient. Furthermore, I fail to see how this will give me more control over my personal and financial information than I already have. As things stand, I don't need to hand over such information to prove who I am. This seems rather like grasping at straws to me!

I don't agree with the argument that says carrying an ID Card is an infringement of civil liberties. I think it's important to be able to prove who you are and frequently those who try to conceal their identity when requested, are precisely the people who are up to something! What does concern me here is that this will be a huge waste of money - a colossal white elephant. The government will waste billions of pounds (even with the public putting in fistfuls of cash themselves) just getting this scheme off the ground and the most important aim of the scheme (to increase our national security by preventing fraud, illegal immigration and terrorism) is unachievable through this scheme. Introducing a further form of identity does not properly address any of these problems. Fraudsters will be able to forge, clone or steal the cards, if not immediately, then some time in the not too distant future. Illegal immigrants will still arrive here and will just continue to do what they do now: present no form of identification so that they cannot be deported, end up being released, and then disappear into the population without a trace. And terrorism is a far greater problem with far more complex issues than can be solved by a bit of plastic - after all, those identified as guilty of or suspected of terrorism in this country in the last decade, have all been here legally.

At the end of the day, an ID card does not tell anyone what you are doing or planning or what your moral, legal, religious or fanatical beliefs are (neither should it). We need to be smarter than this if we want to combat the problems in our society. This is yet another sign of Labour's inability to approach anything with a modicum of common sense or originality.

Swine Flu

As I sit here watching I Am Legend, the story of a lone survivor of an infection that decimates the human population, it is, perhaps fitting that I should blog about Swine Flu.

Swine Flu, even at the worst projected mortality rate, is not going to kill to the extremes of the aforementioned movie. However, it seems that some people seem to think this is an end-of-life-as-we-know-it scenario. On Friday morning I was driving to work with the radio on (taking a well deserved break from singing practice) and heard someone being interviewed on the morning news criticising what was being done. Although I can't remember it verbatim, the person said something along the lines of "If one person has it on a plane, 100 people have it". This assertion gave me a right chuckle since that kind of infection rate would already mean many hundreds of cases in the UK. The "Catch It, Bin It, Kill It" leaflet that I found had been circulated at work on email. I particularly liked the advice about setting up a network of 'Flu-Friends': Not, as you might imagine a group of friends and relatives that you can infect, but instead, a group of minions that you can train to do your bidding should you fall ill (the leaflet suggests that you can ask them to run errands for shopping and medication for you but surely there's more fun to be had than this?)

This is a serious situation, but I really think some people need to get a bit of perspective. Firstly, you're extremely unlikely to catch it passing someone in the street - even sitting next to an infected person on a plane or train is no guarantee of contracting the illness. Furthermore, the UK is fortunate that we have a good stock of antiviral drugs available and with sensible precautions the virus can be contained so that they should not be needed.

I'm not sure that 'Flu-Friends' classes as a precaution, sensible or otherwise.