A couple of weeks ago David Cameron made a speech where he argued that public sector pensions should in his opinion be reformed (this is code for take it off them as they don't deserve it) here is a report of the initial speech and its from the Telegraph so clearly its not balanced as it comes from the right.
At the same time I'm also posting this, which is a simple 10 point response to the initial story and thanks to Tom and Labouandcapital for posting it. The response is by Naomi at the GMB and as she points out,
1. Public sector pensions potentially keep 12million people from reliance on state benefits in retirement.
2. Public sector pension schemes, in particular the funded Local Government Pension Scheme, generate billions of pounds worth of investment in the UK economy.
3. Public sector pension schemes encourage retirement saving among 5.75m public sector workers – 85% of public sector workers are members of a pension scheme (compared with 40% in the private sector).
4. Lack of retirement saving in the private sector will lead to more poverty and significant pressure on state benefits in the future.
5. Greater poverty in retirement resulting from inadequate company pension provision in the private sector will lead to greater pressures on the NHS and local care services.
6. All workers pay for everyone’s retirement income. The price of goods and services includes the cost of private sector pension provision, just like tax levels include the cost of public sector pension provision.
7. State benefits are funded by national insurance and taxation paid by everyone and used more by those with lower incomes e.g. those with inadequate pension savings due to poor private sector provision.
8. Public sector pensions account for about 20% of public sector workers’ remuneration packages.
9. Public sector pension schemes are good quality and rightly so, the country needs private sector schemes to be as good. Lower pensions for all means poverty in old age for all.
10. ‘Apartheid’ was the official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against non-whites; it is not an appropriate description of occupational pension provision.
Now I will declare an interest in this story, I am married to someone who is paying into a public sector pension scheme, someone who is committed to her job and who believes that the public sector and its workers provides a service for the all the people and not just those who can afford it.
So thanks dave for giving us all another reason to remember why tories bad, labour good, as Labour works for the good of the many not just the few.
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
Monday, 15 December 2008
Better late than never
The title of the blog refers both to the lateness of the blog (The anniversary that is the subject of this post being yesterday and all) and the anniversary which is to be celebrated.
The anniversary in question is 90 years since Decmber 14th 1918. What significance does this date hold? Well for that i'll hand you over to the Fawcett Society:
Well here's to those Sufragettes who struggled so hard and for so long for the rights that we now enjoy. And here's also to those still struggling for equality both here in the UK, and in the rest of the world.
The anniversary in question is 90 years since Decmber 14th 1918. What significance does this date hold? Well for that i'll hand you over to the Fawcett Society:
90th anniversary of the first UK election in which women could vote
14 December 2008 is the 90th anniversary of the election of the first woman to the British House of Commons, and the first election in which women (over 30 years) were able to stand as candidates and to vote, after Millicent Fawcett led the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies to win the vote for women in 1918.
Fawcett celebrated the 1918 Representation of the People Act, which gave all women over 30 and married women the right to vote, in February of this year with an event hosted by the Rt Hon Harriet Harman QC MP. The event featured a speech from Baroness Boothroyd, the first female Speaker of the House of Commons.
Fawcett Director Dr Katherine Rake's speech, a Vision for Gender Equality, can be read [Pdf file: here].
To celebrate the anniversary, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography has produced a feature remembering pioneering political women of the time. The feature is available to view by following the link below, and includes biographies of 25 prominent women, including Millicent Fawcett, Emmeline Pankhurt, and Eleanor Rathbone.
Well here's to those Sufragettes who struggled so hard and for so long for the rights that we now enjoy. And here's also to those still struggling for equality both here in the UK, and in the rest of the world.
Oh, the weather outside is frightful
A tip o' the hat to John Gray from whom I got this lovely new snow effect.
And just to give this post a bit more substance how about a bit of actual festive music:
And just to give this post a bit more substance how about a bit of actual festive music:
Sunday, 14 December 2008
The Westboro Baptist Church Choir
"Euthanize David Mitchell!"
Though Cowards Flinch used this same provocative title in a response to an article written by David Mitchell in the Guardian's Comment is free section. This article was concerning euthanasia and was inspired by the recent discussion in the subject brought up by the death of Craig Ewert assisted by the Swiss charity Dignitas.
Though Cowards Flinch had an extremely negative view of the article which I largely share. Whilst I enjoy David Mitchell's comedic work the arguments he offers are weak and the jokes he makes fall flat, for example:
Well no actually, the reason L. casei immunitas has a latin name is because that's how species are named, and I don't think anyone is supposed to believe the etymology works that way round. When a product is named "Excellium" is named in order to suggest excellence, not to make people think that excellence is named after it. It would be stupid to think so and it is stupid of David Mitchell to suggest it because it is blatantly not the case.
And for the information of David Mitchell Dignitas is a german speaking charity which caters to people of other nationalities and tongues. Having the name Dignitas implies what they offer, dignity in death rather than suffering. A point which he misses especially badly:
I don't know, maybe it's because they don't speak english as their native language.
I agree with Though Cowards Flinch on their criticism of this point, lots of things that humans do is not normal by the standard of other animals. Modern medical technology such as respirators and kidney dialysis machines are not normal. An animal in the wild would die if it became ill enough to require dialysis so why do humans do it. We do it because we value life. It may seem contradictory to say that in a post supporting euthanasia but I believe that it's not, I believe that because there are other things that are valuable. Like freedom of determination and also quality of life. Human beings are set apart to quite a large degree by our highly evolved intellects; we are able to appreciate our lives on a higher level than simply the struggle for existence. If that existence coming to an end in such a way that that end will be more relief than tragedy why should the person not be able to take control of their own destiny.
Furthermore to say it is not normal is absolutely no reason at all to say it should be illegal, having the right to end your own suffering does not take away the seriousness of the act. No-one is saying it should be normal, what they are saying is that cognisant human beings should have the right to determine their own destiny without loved ones being prosecuted for helping them in what is a perfectly legal act in itself.
Earlier on in the article he say's that he "[doesn't] begrudge any of those people their hard-won peace" and yet he seems perfectly happen to demean their choice. By his ridiculous assertion that making assisted suicide legal would put pressure on people to arrange their own deaths simply in order to be convenient he essentially implies that the decision is an easy one. The 100 or so Britons that have so far chosen to end their lives with the help of Dignitas did not do so because it was convenient, it I'm sure that it wasn't an easy decision for any of them.
So quite how it would suddenly be an easy option if it was legal in this country I don't know. He makes mention of the survival instinct in humans, and yet misses the point that it is indeed deep rooted, and simply having the opportunity to choose death does not make death an attractive option. To say that we should deny people the right to choose and force people to endure suffering because of some frivolous idea that it would make death attractive and a convenient way to order your life is ridiculous.
One thing that David Mitchell seems not to understand is that it's already legal and easy to commit suicide, human beings are frail so it doesn't take much to kill yourself. Amazingly enough though despite this frailty suicide is happily still relatively rare. If David Mitchell had stopped to consider that he might have realised that that's because people want to live too much to die. When people choose to end their own lives there is a very strong reason (Be that through physical or mental suffering or through mental illness.) to do so.
Suicide is not something to be taken lightly, and recognising a human beings right to self-determination and the ability to end their own suffering would not make it any less so.
I was very disappointed with this article, I felt that it was puerile and had very little thought put into it. David Mitchell is intelligent enough to do better than this.
My thanks to Though Cowards Flinch for putting me on to this and also for their continued high standard of blogging.
Though Cowards Flinch had an extremely negative view of the article which I largely share. Whilst I enjoy David Mitchell's comedic work the arguments he offers are weak and the jokes he makes fall flat, for example:
Like L. casei imunitas, the friendly bacterium, and Excellium, the fuel, it comes from a school of branding that believes that cod-Latinising a nice word makes people believe that your product or service possesses that positive attribute. It's attempting to reverse engineer etymology so that customers will think: 'Of course! We must derive our modern word "immunity" from the ancient Roman anti-bloating yoghurt.' Anyone stupid enough to believe that deserves a big pill.
Well no actually, the reason L. casei immunitas has a latin name is because that's how species are named, and I don't think anyone is supposed to believe the etymology works that way round. When a product is named "Excellium" is named in order to suggest excellence, not to make people think that excellence is named after it. It would be stupid to think so and it is stupid of David Mitchell to suggest it because it is blatantly not the case.
And for the information of David Mitchell Dignitas is a german speaking charity which caters to people of other nationalities and tongues. Having the name Dignitas implies what they offer, dignity in death rather than suffering. A point which he misses especially badly:
But if the clinic wants to say that they'll provide death with dignity, why don't they just name it 'Dignity'?
I don't know, maybe it's because they don't speak english as their native language.
I don't for a moment doubt the agony and sincere desire for death of any of the recently reported cases of assisted suicide. Their circumstances are tragic and I don't begrudge any of those people their hard-won peace. But what they've done is not normal and I wish people would stop going on about it as if it should be.
I agree with Though Cowards Flinch on their criticism of this point, lots of things that humans do is not normal by the standard of other animals. Modern medical technology such as respirators and kidney dialysis machines are not normal. An animal in the wild would die if it became ill enough to require dialysis so why do humans do it. We do it because we value life. It may seem contradictory to say that in a post supporting euthanasia but I believe that it's not, I believe that because there are other things that are valuable. Like freedom of determination and also quality of life. Human beings are set apart to quite a large degree by our highly evolved intellects; we are able to appreciate our lives on a higher level than simply the struggle for existence. If that existence coming to an end in such a way that that end will be more relief than tragedy why should the person not be able to take control of their own destiny.
Furthermore to say it is not normal is absolutely no reason at all to say it should be illegal, having the right to end your own suffering does not take away the seriousness of the act. No-one is saying it should be normal, what they are saying is that cognisant human beings should have the right to determine their own destiny without loved ones being prosecuted for helping them in what is a perfectly legal act in itself.
The main argument cited against legalising assisted suicide is that it may cause people to be put under pressure to end their lives prematurely - pressure, it is implied, that will be exerted by younger relatives who tire of an old person's ill health, moaning, money-hoarding, racism or smell. But I think it's worse than that - I think we'd end up putting pressure on ourselves.
Anyone who plans slightly obsessively - who thinks about packing days before the end of a holiday, puts their coat on during the last scene of a play or leaves football matches early to avoid traffic - is at risk of seeing death, in a society where we control its timing, as merely another job to get done. It's the last thing on the 'to do' list and their organised natures may make them feel duty-bound to 'get it done'.
Earlier on in the article he say's that he "[doesn't] begrudge any of those people their hard-won peace" and yet he seems perfectly happen to demean their choice. By his ridiculous assertion that making assisted suicide legal would put pressure on people to arrange their own deaths simply in order to be convenient he essentially implies that the decision is an easy one. The 100 or so Britons that have so far chosen to end their lives with the help of Dignitas did not do so because it was convenient, it I'm sure that it wasn't an easy decision for any of them.
So quite how it would suddenly be an easy option if it was legal in this country I don't know. He makes mention of the survival instinct in humans, and yet misses the point that it is indeed deep rooted, and simply having the opportunity to choose death does not make death an attractive option. To say that we should deny people the right to choose and force people to endure suffering because of some frivolous idea that it would make death attractive and a convenient way to order your life is ridiculous.
Legalising the right to die would weaken, in some people, the stubborn will to survive which is the cornerstone of our nature. Many would be seduced into finishing life in good order, clearing their desks. Millions of pensioners already dutifully sell their houses, move into care homes and take out insurance policies to pay for funeral expenses: they don't want to be a bother or a financial drain. It's not going to take much to make some of them give everything up - give up - just to be selfless and tidy. Only the selfish and messy will make old bones.
One thing that David Mitchell seems not to understand is that it's already legal and easy to commit suicide, human beings are frail so it doesn't take much to kill yourself. Amazingly enough though despite this frailty suicide is happily still relatively rare. If David Mitchell had stopped to consider that he might have realised that that's because people want to live too much to die. When people choose to end their own lives there is a very strong reason (Be that through physical or mental suffering or through mental illness.) to do so.
Suicide is not something to be taken lightly, and recognising a human beings right to self-determination and the ability to end their own suffering would not make it any less so.
I was very disappointed with this article, I felt that it was puerile and had very little thought put into it. David Mitchell is intelligent enough to do better than this.
My thanks to Though Cowards Flinch for putting me on to this and also for their continued high standard of blogging.
Saturday, 13 December 2008
How many Liberal Democrats does it take to fix a boiler
Edit: In the interests of fairness it should be pointed out that the opinion of Brian Coleman, Conservative chairman of London's fire authority, is not shared by the fire brigade itself:
How many Liberal Democrats does it take to fix a boiler.
The answer is none, you just dial 999 and ask the fire brigade to do it.
[The problem with the boiler was described thusly: "The floor was shaking and the noise was so loud it was filling the street," Miss Featherstone told BBC London 94.9]
Believe it or not that is exactly what Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone did, now in London I know it can cost a lot to call a plumber out but do you really think that calling the men with the big red fire engine and the flashing lights is the best way to make sure you have hot water.
Its not often I would congratulate a tory on this blog but Brian Coleman the chair of the London Fire Authority get it right when he said,
"We are not Lynne Featherstone’s heating engineers. There could have been a serious incident somewhere else. It costs £250 per hour for a call out and I look forward to receiving her cheque. She has shown herself to be completely dizzy. Airheads and airlocks are obviously not unrelated."
What do you expect from a Liberal Democrat MP.
PS by the way the London Fire Brigade fixed the problem during the call out so not only do they put fires out but the can make sure the pilot lights are on too :)
PPS a big thanks to Kerron Cross for pointing this one out
A London Fire Brigade spokeswoman said: "If it's obvious that there has been an ongoing problem with the boiler, then you can call a plumber.
"But if your boiler suddenly starts making strange noises in the middle of the night, call the fire brigade."
How many Liberal Democrats does it take to fix a boiler.
The answer is none, you just dial 999 and ask the fire brigade to do it.
[The problem with the boiler was described thusly: "The floor was shaking and the noise was so loud it was filling the street," Miss Featherstone told BBC London 94.9]
Believe it or not that is exactly what Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone did, now in London I know it can cost a lot to call a plumber out but do you really think that calling the men with the big red fire engine and the flashing lights is the best way to make sure you have hot water.
Its not often I would congratulate a tory on this blog but Brian Coleman the chair of the London Fire Authority get it right when he said,
"We are not Lynne Featherstone’s heating engineers. There could have been a serious incident somewhere else. It costs £250 per hour for a call out and I look forward to receiving her cheque. She has shown herself to be completely dizzy. Airheads and airlocks are obviously not unrelated."
What do you expect from a Liberal Democrat MP.
PS by the way the London Fire Brigade fixed the problem during the call out so not only do they put fires out but the can make sure the pilot lights are on too :)
PPS a big thanks to Kerron Cross for pointing this one out
A Twist on a Classic Christmas Carol
After Peter posted a news "story" from the Mail I thought I'd keep up the trend by posting something from another group of intolerant loons. Here, via Respectful Intolerance is the Westboro Baptist Church's idea of a carol:
You'd better watch out, get ready to cry,
You'd better go hide, I'm telling you why
'cuz Santa Claus will take you to hell
He is your favorite idol
You worship at his feet
But when you stand before your God
He won't help you take the heat
So get this fact straight:
You're feeling God's hate
Santa's to blame for the economy's fate
Santa Claus will take you to hell.
Friday, 12 December 2008
Anne Begg's Week
[Disclaimer]: Aberdeen University and its blog are not connected to Anne Begg MP in an official capacity. The writers of this blog are solely responsible for its contents, and therefore this blog may not reflect the views or positions of Anne Begg MP. For Anne Begg MP's offical website please go to www.annebegg.com.
One of the main pillars of a democratic community is accountability. It's hard to hold elected representatives responsible if you don't know what they've been doing. To enable her constituents to follow the work she does on their behalf Anne Begg the MP for Aberdeen South posts what she has done each week on her website. I'm pleased to say that we are also able to facilitate the democratic process by cross posting that information here.
Week beginning 8th December – Good news for trawlermen.
I wasn't able to be in the Chamber on Monday for the debate on the Speaker's response to the Police search of an MP's Westminster office as I had to attend a funeral in Aberdeen in the morning. Once I managed to make it down to London I arrived 4 minutes too late for the first vote. I would have made it if BA had been able to get my wheelchair to the aircraft side instead of me having to pick it up off the luggage carousel! Nevertheless, missing the debate didn't get me out of taking part in Radio Scotland's 'Scotland at Ten' programme.
Tuesday and Wednesday are always particularly busy days in Westminster with end to end meetings and events, and this week was no different. A range of different organisations want to lobby MPs either individually or in a group. On Tuesday there was the Communication Workers Union, who wanted to lobby on the future of the Royal Mail and Post Office network, the Big Lottery Fund and Equity on Scottish broadcasting to name a few. Unfortunately, however, I ran out of time so didn't get to meet the Olympic rowers at a celebratory reception being held for them.
I also had meetings of All Party Groups which I sit on, these groups meet to advance a particular issue or support a certain cause, industry or country. Tuesday saw the inauguration of a new one, the Chronic Pain group, and I am its new Chairman. I also had a meeting of another group I Chair, the All Party Equalities Group. With an Equalities Bill announced in the Queen's Speech this group will have busy year. However, on Wednesday it was the European dimension we were discussing with our guest Richard Hewitt MEP.
Wednesday saw the highlight of my week, when Tony McNulty, the Minister of State for Employment and Welfare Reform, come in to give evidence before my Select Committee. I only managed to speak once in the Chamber this week, and that was also on Wednesday during Scottish Questions. I asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, Jim Murphy MP, about Scotland's future energy needs (you can see my question and the Minister’s reply here).
On Thursday I sat in the Chamber for the statement on Welfare Reform and BERR questions but, unfortunately, I did not get called. This was disappointing as I particularly wanted to congratulate the Minister of State for Employment Relations and Postal Affairs, Pat McFadden MP, for his decision to rerun the Cod War Trawlermen's Compensation Scheme. While I have over a hundred constituents who have received pay outs from the scheme, there were some who had got very little because they had a break in service through no fault of their own. I have been lobbying the government hard since the Ombudsman ruled this was unfair, so Thursday's news was very welcome indeed.
Friday will be the usual organised chaos with a presentation ceremony for the winners of my annual Christmas card competition in the morning; a meeting with Grampian Society for the Blind; a Christmas carol concert at Hazlehead Primary and then constituent surgeries.
I think it's interesting to note that it seems that even MPs get crap service from airlines. I'd also like express my appreciation of the Labour Government's continual striving for equality, I think the ideal of an equitable society is central to Party and is something we must continue to strive for.
One of the main pillars of a democratic community is accountability. It's hard to hold elected representatives responsible if you don't know what they've been doing. To enable her constituents to follow the work she does on their behalf Anne Begg the MP for Aberdeen South posts what she has done each week on her website. I'm pleased to say that we are also able to facilitate the democratic process by cross posting that information here.
Week beginning 8th December – Good news for trawlermen.
I wasn't able to be in the Chamber on Monday for the debate on the Speaker's response to the Police search of an MP's Westminster office as I had to attend a funeral in Aberdeen in the morning. Once I managed to make it down to London I arrived 4 minutes too late for the first vote. I would have made it if BA had been able to get my wheelchair to the aircraft side instead of me having to pick it up off the luggage carousel! Nevertheless, missing the debate didn't get me out of taking part in Radio Scotland's 'Scotland at Ten' programme.
Tuesday and Wednesday are always particularly busy days in Westminster with end to end meetings and events, and this week was no different. A range of different organisations want to lobby MPs either individually or in a group. On Tuesday there was the Communication Workers Union, who wanted to lobby on the future of the Royal Mail and Post Office network, the Big Lottery Fund and Equity on Scottish broadcasting to name a few. Unfortunately, however, I ran out of time so didn't get to meet the Olympic rowers at a celebratory reception being held for them.
I also had meetings of All Party Groups which I sit on, these groups meet to advance a particular issue or support a certain cause, industry or country. Tuesday saw the inauguration of a new one, the Chronic Pain group, and I am its new Chairman. I also had a meeting of another group I Chair, the All Party Equalities Group. With an Equalities Bill announced in the Queen's Speech this group will have busy year. However, on Wednesday it was the European dimension we were discussing with our guest Richard Hewitt MEP.
Wednesday saw the highlight of my week, when Tony McNulty, the Minister of State for Employment and Welfare Reform, come in to give evidence before my Select Committee. I only managed to speak once in the Chamber this week, and that was also on Wednesday during Scottish Questions. I asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, Jim Murphy MP, about Scotland's future energy needs (you can see my question and the Minister’s reply here).
On Thursday I sat in the Chamber for the statement on Welfare Reform and BERR questions but, unfortunately, I did not get called. This was disappointing as I particularly wanted to congratulate the Minister of State for Employment Relations and Postal Affairs, Pat McFadden MP, for his decision to rerun the Cod War Trawlermen's Compensation Scheme. While I have over a hundred constituents who have received pay outs from the scheme, there were some who had got very little because they had a break in service through no fault of their own. I have been lobbying the government hard since the Ombudsman ruled this was unfair, so Thursday's news was very welcome indeed.
Friday will be the usual organised chaos with a presentation ceremony for the winners of my annual Christmas card competition in the morning; a meeting with Grampian Society for the Blind; a Christmas carol concert at Hazlehead Primary and then constituent surgeries.
I think it's interesting to note that it seems that even MPs get crap service from airlines. I'd also like express my appreciation of the Labour Government's continual striving for equality, I think the ideal of an equitable society is central to Party and is something we must continue to strive for.
Comment is Free
Over the past while the Guardian has been allowing interested parties to write an article under the headline of comment is free, indeed this blog has featured one already just look here. But today we post another and this time by the wonderful Polly Toynbee and I thank Leslie Kennedy Clark for finding it. So see what you think and start commenting.
A very interesting christmas tree
Ok this may be the only time I ever post about a story in the Daily Mail that I like but this is one of them.
So to the Christmas tree in question here is your first club blog post.
So to the Christmas tree in question here is your first club blog post.
Thursday, 11 December 2008
The Worst Predictions for 2008
Now I know that not everyone can be incredibly accurate political barometers like we are at the Aberdeen University Labour Club, but some of these predictions are just horribly wrong.
My favourite has to be:
Not quite on target with that one were you William. Never mind, I'm sure closer to the time you made better predictions.
Or not.
My favourite has to be:
“If [Hillary Clinton] gets a race against John Edwards and Barack Obama, she’s going to be the nominee. Gore is the only threat to her, then. … Barack Obama is not going to beat Hillary Clinton in a single Democratic primary. I’ll predict that right now.” —William Kristol, Fox News Sunday, Dec. 17, 2006
Not quite on target with that one were you William. Never mind, I'm sure closer to the time you made better predictions.
After Iowa, Kristol lurched to the other extreme, declaring that Clinton would lose New Hampshire and that “There will be no Clinton Restoration.” It’s also worth pointing out that this second wildly premature prediction was made in a Times column titled, “President Mike Huckabee?”
Or not.
I <3 Jon Stewart
He can be hilariously funny, but at times like this he can also be compassionate and rational. I love the way he just keeps on going back to Mike Huckabee's intolerance but he at the same time he's so polite. I'm not sure I could keep a cool head in the face of such obstinance.
It's a fantastic video and i hope you all enjoy it, I got it from the fantastic ERV. She's an extremely talented young scientist and blogger so maybe if you've got a few minutes free you can go and check out her site.
It's a fantastic video and i hope you all enjoy it, I got it from the fantastic ERV. She's an extremely talented young scientist and blogger so maybe if you've got a few minutes free you can go and check out her site.
Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Human Rights Day/Blogoroma III: Feministing
I don't know how many of you knew it but today was the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights. If you're interested you can read the declaration in its entirety (Which I recommend as it's a very inspiring document) here.
(Also in Gàidhlig Albanach here and Cesky here.)
I thought that since today is also Blogorama DayTM I would highlight a blog which offered some coverage of the event. It's a bit of a departure from the main focus of blogorama, that is to cover Labour bloggers, but I'm tired and so you'll just have to settle this week for one of my favourite blogs, Feministing.
Feministing is a feminist (Duh!) blog written by a group of very talented young female bloggers. They cover a range of issues related to gender equality and women's rights. What I especially appreciate is their focus beyond their own sphere to look at gay rights and racial issues as well. They are always very frank about some of the more unfortunate issues related to historical feminism, specifically the focus of most feminism being on the rights of white women and ignoring the situation of other ethnicities.
The main author behind Feministing is Jessica Valenti, who as well as being the found of Feministing is also an excellent author. She has released two books on the issue feminism (Both of which I naturally own.); Full Frontal Feminism and He's a Stud, She's a Slut and 49 Other Double Standards Every Woman Should Know.
She now has a third book in the pipeline, The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women , which focuses on the US's incredibly creepy "Purity" balls.
If you think I'm being harsh by calling the things creepy you really need to read this quote taken from the article:
I think even Freud would be creeped out by that...
Anyway back on topic. They covered Human Rights Day with an article highlighting the work done by human right's campaigners around the world to improve their own communities. I think that that's something we can all appreciate and respect.
From Feministing:
There's one common thread that connects these disparate groups of people, and that's co-operation. (I think it links nicely back to the post I made earlier about Unions.) When people work together we can achieve great things, our diverse skills and experiences add up to make an incredibly effective whole, which when channeled in a positive manner can effect great changes and move us towards a more equal society for everyone. That's what makes these community groups flourish, and it's what makes Labour so great.
(Also in Gàidhlig Albanach here and Cesky here.)
I thought that since today is also Blogorama DayTM I would highlight a blog which offered some coverage of the event. It's a bit of a departure from the main focus of blogorama, that is to cover Labour bloggers, but I'm tired and so you'll just have to settle this week for one of my favourite blogs, Feministing.
Feministing is a feminist (Duh!) blog written by a group of very talented young female bloggers. They cover a range of issues related to gender equality and women's rights. What I especially appreciate is their focus beyond their own sphere to look at gay rights and racial issues as well. They are always very frank about some of the more unfortunate issues related to historical feminism, specifically the focus of most feminism being on the rights of white women and ignoring the situation of other ethnicities.
The main author behind Feministing is Jessica Valenti, who as well as being the found of Feministing is also an excellent author. She has released two books on the issue feminism (Both of which I naturally own.); Full Frontal Feminism and He's a Stud, She's a Slut and 49 Other Double Standards Every Woman Should Know.
She now has a third book in the pipeline, The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women , which focuses on the US's incredibly creepy "Purity" balls.
If you think I'm being harsh by calling the things creepy you really need to read this quote taken from the article:
But first...a creepy anecdote.
Kylie Miraldi has come from California to celebrate her 18th birthday tonight. She'll be going to San Jose State on a volleyball scholarship next year. Her father, who looks a little like Superman, is on the dance floor with one of her sisters; he turns out to be Dean Miraldi, a former offensive lineman with the Philadelphia Eagles. When Kylie was 13, her parents took her on a hike in Lake Tahoe, Calif. "We discussed what it means to be a teenager in today's world," she says. They gave her a charm for her bracelet--a lock in the shape of a heart. Her father has the key. "On my wedding day, he'll give it to my husband," she explains. "It's a symbol of my father giving up the covering of my heart, protecting me, since it means my husband is now the protector. He becomes like the shield to my heart, to love me as I'm supposed to be loved."
Paging Dr. Freud!
I think even Freud would be creeped out by that...
Anyway back on topic. They covered Human Rights Day with an article highlighting the work done by human right's campaigners around the world to improve their own communities. I think that that's something we can all appreciate and respect.
From Feministing:
Today is the anniversary of the passage of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
Sixty years on, we pay tribute to the extraordinary vision of the Declaration's original drafters and to the many human rights defenders around the world who have struggled to make their vision a reality.
The Declaration belongs to each and every one of us - read it, learn it, promote it and claim it as your own.
During its "16 Days" series, MADRE, an amazing international women's rights organization, has been posting some great examples on their blog of women around the world who are taking this to heart.
In Kenya, women established a village called Umoja ("unity") where violence against women is prohibited.
In Colombia, in communities threatened by violence from military and paramilitary groups, a group called LIMPAL works to support displaced women and their families.
In Sudan, women have created a farmer's union to allow them to demand government support for their agricultural projects.
It's important to remember that Human Rights Day isn't about calling on other countries to honor basic human rights. It's about working for those rights in our own communities.
There's one common thread that connects these disparate groups of people, and that's co-operation. (I think it links nicely back to the post I made earlier about Unions.) When people work together we can achieve great things, our diverse skills and experiences add up to make an incredibly effective whole, which when channeled in a positive manner can effect great changes and move us towards a more equal society for everyone. That's what makes these community groups flourish, and it's what makes Labour so great.
Unions are a free-market solution
The Questionable Authority (That's the name of the blog by the way.) has a fantastic piece up about the Right's hypocritical hatred of Unions. Here's the start of the piece:
You can find the rest here.
This article is about the US, but it has strong parallels in this country. To see how vilified Unions have been by the Tories you just have to look back to Margaret Thatcher's description of the 1984 Miners' Strike:
That's right the democratically elected Head of government directly compared the struggle of workers in this country to militaristic actions of a fascist dictatorship. In this internet age there's a phrase for that.
We have to ask ourselves where this hatred comes form. After all surely it's better for workers to do things for themselves, gain advancement through their own work rather by "Tax and Spend" politics that the Conservative so dearly loves to hate.
We're talking about groups of workers who don't need to rely on any outside assistance, they're standing on their own two feet. Surely the Tories should love them.
And yet they don't.
And it just shows the Tories for what they are. Unions are about societal justice, they work to ensure that the voices of the weak are heard by the powerful. They act to build a fairer job market in which workers don't have to accept whatever lousy conditions their all powerful employer deigns to hand out. And that's what the Tories hate, because in the kind of society that the Unions want to tear down it's the Tories with the money and the power, and that's why they don't want change.
David Cameron recently compared himself to Barack Obama. Well I'll take a leaf out of Obama's speech book; a smug Thatcherite bastard, thant's not change, that's more the same.
Britain doesn't want more of the same, that's why we kicked them out in '97, and if we work hard, and get our message out, we'll keep them out at the next General Election as well.
Like most people who pay attention to the news, I've been treated to several weeks of Republicans using the Detroit bailout as an excuse to bash unions. Like a broken record, it was easy to ignore for a while, but the repetitive droning of discredited canards (like $70/hr wages) is getting more and more and more annoying.
And it's particularly annoying because the vast bulk of the union-bashing is coming from the alleged free-market conservatives. What the hell is so conservative about beating up on unions, anyway. Unions are the quintessential model of a market based solution to a problem. The management and the money people might not like them, but that alone doesn't mean they're not a market solution - unless the real criteria for "free-market" is "stuff that makes people who already have money happier".
Yes, I'm serious. Let's take a minute or two to think about what unions actually are, and what they do.
At its most fundamental, a union is nothing more or less than a group of people who have figured out that if they act together to place limits on the supply of their own labor, the businesses that have a demand for that labor will need to pay more. Unions are basically employee-owned businesses that sell labor. Like any good business, they try to both encourage demand and control the supply.
You can find the rest here.
This article is about the US, but it has strong parallels in this country. To see how vilified Unions have been by the Tories you just have to look back to Margaret Thatcher's description of the 1984 Miners' Strike:
As she famously - and controversially - framed the dispute at the time, "We had to fight the enemy without in the Falklands. We always have to be aware of the enemy within, which is much more difficult to fight and more dangerous to liberty."
That's right the democratically elected Head of government directly compared the struggle of workers in this country to militaristic actions of a fascist dictatorship. In this internet age there's a phrase for that.
We have to ask ourselves where this hatred comes form. After all surely it's better for workers to do things for themselves, gain advancement through their own work rather by "Tax and Spend" politics that the Conservative so dearly loves to hate.
We're talking about groups of workers who don't need to rely on any outside assistance, they're standing on their own two feet. Surely the Tories should love them.
And yet they don't.
And it just shows the Tories for what they are. Unions are about societal justice, they work to ensure that the voices of the weak are heard by the powerful. They act to build a fairer job market in which workers don't have to accept whatever lousy conditions their all powerful employer deigns to hand out. And that's what the Tories hate, because in the kind of society that the Unions want to tear down it's the Tories with the money and the power, and that's why they don't want change.
David Cameron recently compared himself to Barack Obama. Well I'll take a leaf out of Obama's speech book; a smug Thatcherite bastard, thant's not change, that's more the same.
Britain doesn't want more of the same, that's why we kicked them out in '97, and if we work hard, and get our message out, we'll keep them out at the next General Election as well.
What the...!?!?!?!?!?!
I hate being angry at a Labour government but crap like this pisses me off.
I especially "love" this bit:
NO OBLIGATION TO PROMOTE EQUALITY!!!
The protection of the rights of citizens should be one of the main priorities of government. Thankfully they've dropped their challenge, but unfortunately they refuse to support a Europe wide pro-equality stance.
I especially "love" this bit:
"There is no positive obligation to create a structure for legal recognition or registration of same-sex relationships," it said, claiming that in other countries any such obligation may be out of keeping with the social, cultural and religious norms and traditions.
NO OBLIGATION TO PROMOTE EQUALITY!!!
The protection of the rights of citizens should be one of the main priorities of government. Thankfully they've dropped their challenge, but unfortunately they refuse to support a Europe wide pro-equality stance.
Tuesday, 9 December 2008
A nice video of Johann Hari taking a slice out of Richard Littlejohn
I think Johann raises a very good point; publications like the Daily Mail that constantly stir up bile against immigrants and Islam and whatever else they happen to hate that week create a climate in which that kind of behaviour is acceptable. Littlejohn's response tells you a lot about the man, he had no arguements with which he could defend himself so he had to resort to being patronising.
This article gives a good summary of quite what makes Littlejohn such an unpleasant individual. It includes this segment which quotes from one of Littlejohn's own columns:
But when another genocide was being perpetrated – this time by black Hutus against black Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994 – he wrote, "Does anyone really give a monkey's about what happens in Rwanda? If the Mbongo tribe wants to wipe out the Mbingo tribe then as far as I am concerned that is entirely a matter for them."
Note the (possibly subliminal) use of the word ‘monkey’. Note the implicit idea that black people’s ethnic identifications are ridiculous – from a man who constantly ridicules the “smelly” French and “dictatorial” Germans.
I find this kind of bigotry disgusting; the fact that he is completely unable to empathise at all with the plight of fellow human beings absolutely appals me. That anyone in modern bBritain could so easily dismiss the brutal murder of over a million and the rape of even more speaks volumes about how far we still have to progress as a society.
Wikipedia has a list of incidents involving him and people who share the same low opinion of him that I do.
Here's another quote from Johann Hari's article:
The brilliant Marina Hyde of the Guardian has helpfully compiled a log of Dick’s references to homosexuality. In 2003, he referred “24 times to gays, 17 to homosexuals, 15 to cottaging, seven to rent boys, six to lesbians, six times to being "homophobic" and four times to "homophobia" (note Richard's scornful inverted commas), twice to poovery and once to buggery. That's a mere 82 mentions in 90-odd columns.” In 2004, he excelled himself, and “referred 42 times to gays, 16 times to lesbians, 15 to homosexuals, eight to bisexuals, twice to "homophobia" and six to being "homophobic" (note his scornful inverted commas), five times to cottaging, four to "gay sex in public toilets", three to poofs, twice to lesbianism, and once each to buggery, dykery, and poovery. This amounts to 104 references in 90-odd columns.”
I think it is an important role of the Labour Party to fight against the casual homophobia that permeates through society. Many times I have heard people casually throw out homophobic slurs such as "poof" or describe someone or something as "gay" if they do something stupid or "unmanly".
The use of slurs creates an atmosphere in which those slurs are acceptable, by doing so it brings violence against oppressed groups closer to the main stream. it is for this reason why we as believers in equality must do more than simply believe in it. We must speak out against intolerance, not just in speeches or at political gatherings but in public and social settings as well.
This recent ad makes the point very well:
(What would we do without Youtube?)
Monday, 8 December 2008
Re-fresher's Fayre
I have just received word from the most excellent VP Societies and Student Activities Johnny Keating, that the Re-fresher's Fayre (Ye olde spellings be the beste) is to be on Thursday the 5th of February.
this is a fantastic opportunity to pressgangbrainwash kidnap recruit new members to the Labour Club. We will though need to have volunteers to help run the stall adn possibly also to help with advertising prior to the Fayre. If you are free and would like to help out please e-mail us at aberdeenuniversitylabourclub@nospamgmail.com. (Delete the nospam bit.)
I realise that it's a long way away so there will be reminders closer to the time.
Andrew
this is a fantastic opportunity to pressgang
I realise that it's a long way away so there will be reminders closer to the time.
Andrew
Sunday, 7 December 2008
A History Lesson (Part 2)
Ok, part two is Leaders of the Labour Party from 1935 right up to the present day. As before it will include how long they were leader and their parliamentary seat.
Clement Attlee 20 years, 2 months, Limehouse & Walthamstow West
Hugh Gaitskell 7 years, 1 month, Leeds West
George Brown 3 weeks, 6 days, Belper *
Harold Wilson 13 years, 1 month, Huyton
Jim Callaghan 4 years, 6 months, Cardiff South East
Michael Foot 2 years, 10 months, Ebbw Vale
Neil Kinnock 8 years, 9 months Islywn
John Smith 1 year, 9 months, Moncklands East
Margaret Beckett 2 months, 1 week, Derby South *
Tony Blair 12 years, 11 months Sedgfield
Gordon Brown Present Leader Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath
Those entries with a * are Leaders who succeeded following the death of the Leader of the party and as there is no position of acting leader they were according to the riles of the party leader and would be until confirmed or not using the appropriate election mechanism. Both lost to men who would become Prime Minister.
So there is the complete list and here is a national breakdown of leaders, now for this even though a few Scots were representing seats in other parts of the UK I'm looking at their original nationality and how many became Prime Minister.
Scots 8 Leaders 3 Prime Minister
English 9 Leaders 3 Prime Minister
Welsh 1 Leaders 0 Prime Minister
Clement Attlee 20 years, 2 months, Limehouse & Walthamstow West
Hugh Gaitskell 7 years, 1 month, Leeds West
George Brown 3 weeks, 6 days, Belper *
Harold Wilson 13 years, 1 month, Huyton
Jim Callaghan 4 years, 6 months, Cardiff South East
Michael Foot 2 years, 10 months, Ebbw Vale
Neil Kinnock 8 years, 9 months Islywn
John Smith 1 year, 9 months, Moncklands East
Margaret Beckett 2 months, 1 week, Derby South *
Tony Blair 12 years, 11 months Sedgfield
Gordon Brown Present Leader Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath
Those entries with a * are Leaders who succeeded following the death of the Leader of the party and as there is no position of acting leader they were according to the riles of the party leader and would be until confirmed or not using the appropriate election mechanism. Both lost to men who would become Prime Minister.
So there is the complete list and here is a national breakdown of leaders, now for this even though a few Scots were representing seats in other parts of the UK I'm looking at their original nationality and how many became Prime Minister.
Scots 8 Leaders 3 Prime Minister
English 9 Leaders 3 Prime Minister
Welsh 1 Leaders 0 Prime Minister
Blast From the Past
While I was doing research for yesterday's post regarding Anne Begg MP I found an excellent speech from September 1999 (You know, back when the Moon was thrown out of orbit and we lost contact with Moonbase Alpha, you remember that don't you?) that articulates perfectly the great work Labour had done in just 2 years in office. Reading or hearing speeches like this makes me so proud to call myself a member of this great party. This is what sets us out, these are our values and this what we can achieve when we work together.
This speech was made at the 1999 Party Conference in Bournemouth. It was made by the then Social Security Secretary (Making him a predecessor to friend of the Labour Club and current Secretary of State for Work and Pensions James Purnell.). That MP, sadly now lost to obscurity,is an alumnus of this very University, one Mr Alistair Darling MP.
Today, I want to set out our vision for a new Welfare State.
How we are making a difference.
How we are already delivering. For families, for the disabled, for pensioners.
How we are tackling poverty and the causes of poverty for millions of people.
How we're already taking nearly a million children out of poverty.
But I also want to set out why we are making changes.
For me, it's quite simple. In the 1980s I saw poor people get poorer while the country got richer.
I saw children who were never going to get the start in life they needed.
And why? Not because they weren't the children of hard-working, caring parents.
But because they were born in the wrong place. At the wrong time. Under a Tory Government.
And in the 1990s, I saw the same people. Who by then believed that change could never come.
Well now we are making changes. For them, and millions like them.
And you know what makes me most proud?
Not that my Department will - from next April - be paying out a record increase in Child Benefit.
Though I am proud of that.
But that my Department is now part of a Government wide strategy to heal the scars of a nation divided for too long.
Child Benefit. Sure Start. New Deal. The Working Families Tax Credit - amounting to the most complete assault on poverty and exclusion in a generation.
That's a Labour Government delivering.
And last week, we launched our strategy to tackle poverty and promote opportunity for all.
The most radical and far-reaching campaign against poverty since Beveridge.
For the first time a government standing up to be counted.
Setting standards against which we'll be judged.
Confronting poverty. Promoting opportunity.
Because opportunity for all is at the very heart of our values.
Labour Values
Our enduring values. Labour values. Of decency, merit, rights matched by responsibilities. Community. Fairness.
The same values that underpinned the founding of the Welfare State fifty years ago.
Without doubt, one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century.
We are proud of it and we are proud of what it's done.
It lifted millions out of poverty.
The Tory legacy
We're fighting a war against poverty. For 18 years, the Tories fought a war against the poor.
Ten years ago, the Tories claimed that poverty didn't exist. Last week, their spokesman, a man with two brains we're told, said it was too complex.
There's a clear difference between us and the Tories.
The Tories tell you why you can't tackle poverty. We'll tell you how we can.
Look at what they left.
1 in 5 people living in a household where no one worked. Twice what it was in 1979.
Nearly a million children living on benefits for more than 5 years.
Low skills. Poor housing. Rising crime. Mass unemployment.
It is morally wrong. It's socially divisive. And it's economically foolish to write off generation after generation.
And the Tories have learnt nothing.
Given a chance, they'd do it all again.
Even now the Tories are opposing every single step we are taking to confront poverty.
These Tories are the same people who left us, in the final years of the 20th century, a shameful legacy of poverty. A scar upon our country.
By the time they left office, 1 in 3 children were living in poverty. Three times more than in 1979.
Those were Thatcher's children.
Never again. We owe it to our children and the generations to come.
That's why we are the first Government ever to promise to eradicate child poverty in 20 years. And we will.
Today, as every day, 2000 children will be born.
But in these, the last few months of the 20th century, a third of them will be born into poverty.
And if we do nothing, these children will not only be born poor.
They will live poor. And die poor.
In a poverty of opportunity and in a poverty of expectation.
2000 children born. 2000 reasons why welfare reform is essential.
Supporting families
That's why we're supporting families. The largest ever rise in Child Benefit. Helping 12 million children.
And one million more children getting extra help through reform of the CSA. With mothers keeping more of the money they get.
And from next week, nearly £5 more for lone parents with young children.
Already, families with children are on average £740 a year better off.
Increasing opportunity
But fighting poverty isn't just about cash. It's about housing. It's about skills. It's about increasing opportunity for our children.
That's why we're investing an extra £19 billion in education
That's why we're supporting children in their early years.
Take Sure Start. Bringing healthcare, early education and childcare services together. To help support young children and their families. Tackling the root causes of poverty.
That's a Labour Government delivering for children.
Helping people into work
We also know that for families work is the best way out of poverty.
But for two decades millions of people were denied the opportunity to work.
In many areas we saw a second or third generation of people who have never known work.
Where people came to believe that their children would do no better than themselves.
That's why we've introduced the New Deal.
And it is working. Over 120,000 young people have found jobs.
The New Deal for Lone Parents. Who wanted to work but didn't believe they could. And 21,000 now in work.
The New Deal for Disabled People. For the million disabled people who want to work.
The new Disability Rights Commission.
Up and down the country, people getting the help to help themselves.
Making work pay
We're making work pay. The first ever National Minimum Wage.
From next week, the Working Families Tax Credit.
And from next week. Lone parents who get a job can keep their benefits for the first two weeks in a job. Helping bridge the gap between benefits and work.
Making sure that people are better off in work than they are on benefit.
Making work possible
And not only making work pay. But making work possible.
The first ever National Child Care Strategy.
And, for the first time, parents rights to time off to care for their children.
And I can announce today that we will help low-income parents take up these rights. By giving them access to benefits.
We're getting people into work. Making work pay. Making work possible.
Security for those who can't
But we're also providing security for those who can't work.
That's why we're introducing the new Disability income guarantee.
And security for today's pensioners too. Too many of them poor. Too many of them in cold houses. Too many of them worrying about their health. That's the Tory legacy.
That's why we've increased the Winter Fuel Payment five-fold this year. £100. Paid in time for Christmas.
We've restored free eye-tests. Cut VAT on fuel. Invested £21 billion more in the NHS.
The challenge ahead
We're meeting the challenges of today. And we've shown we can take difficult decisions.
Break new ground. Take on sometimes entrenched attitudes.
But there is still much more to do.
Take work. We are determined to break the spiral of despair, of a world where people were trapped on benefit. Trapped in poverty.
When we set up the New Deal, we said there could be no fifth option to stay at home when you could work.
People said that was harsh. It isn't. We've cut youth unemployment by 60%.
Now we're going further. For the first time we are bringing together the Employment Service and the Benefits Agency in the new ONE service.
Help to get a job. To get skills. Advice. But in return we are saying you need to come in for interview to see what's available.
A new culture. New rights. New responsibilities.
Some people say it's a tough approach. I don't. It's the right thing to do.
It's easy to send out a Giro. But a Giro won't get you a job. Or improve your skills. So we need to do more. We are doing more.
We are helping people to help themselves. Help that was never there before.
That's what people want. Their government working for them.
Take disability.
I know reform of Incapacity Benefit is difficult. But it's got to be done.
And let's nail this lie that we're cutting spending on disabled people. We're not.
The truth is we're spending two billion pounds more this Parliament.
And two billion pounds on top of that - because for the first time ever we're providing pensions for disabled workers and carers.
We're bringing the benefits system up to date. We're helping the very people who need that help most.
That's why we've raised the benefits paid to people disabled from birth by up to £26 a week. For life.
And we're tackling pensioner poverty.
Some pensioners' incomes have risen dramatically thanks to occupational pensions.
Pensions you fought for.
But the tragedy is that too many pensioners still face poverty in old age.
How dare the Tories criticise our pension reforms when they allowed hard-working people to work throughout their lives only to retire dependent on benefits from Day One.
That's why we introduced a minimum income guarantee. To help those who lost most.
After 18 years of Tory Government, one in three people working today will retire dependent on Income Support.
So we're making the changes we need.
Improving SERPS. A new State Second Pension.
Under SERPS if you don't earn much. You don't get much.
Under SERPS someone on £6,000 a year gets £13 a week.
Under the new State Second Pension, they get £46.
No-one is going to tell me that isn't an improvement.
And millions of hard-working people had no way to save for their pensions. So we filled that gap.
New Stakeholder Pensions. Helping up to 5 million people save for their retirement.
And we're making sure it's easier for pensioners to take up their entitlement.
Using modern technology to make sure people get easy access to the help they are entitled to.
We're making the system efficient, tackling Tory waste.
When we came into office two out of every five Income Support cases was wrong.
Now we're saving a billion pounds just by getting claims right. Helping to pay for more Child Benefit.
Under the Tories, the benefit system was part of the problem, when it should have been part of the solution.
Labour is delivering: the Tories still opposing
Labour is delivering. And we'll continue to deliver.
Just like the Tories will continue to oppose.
Like they opposed the New Deal. They're still calling it "expensive". "Unnecessary." "A colossal failure." Tell that to the 150,000 people who found jobs through the New Deal.
And they opposed the National Minimum Wage. They've always opposed it. And if they ever get into power, they'll abolish it. Two million people will lose out.
And they're pledged to abolish the new Working Families Tax Credit. An instant tax rise for the lowest paid families of £24 a week.
So don't imagine that what we have achieved is safe.
The Tories haven't changed. They're still stuck in the past.
But we are looking to the future. We're already modernising Britain. And it's already working.
Debate
We cannot predict the future any more than Beveridge could fifty years ago.
The principles and values that underpin the welfare state will endure.
But what it does and how it does it must change to meet the needs of the world of the 21st century.
We live in a changing world. And the welfare state must change with it. There are difficult decisions. And we've got to face up to them.
Not to do so would be to abandon the very people who trusted us to make a difference.
Our commitment is not in doubt.
In Durham, in July, the National Policy Forum showed that our Party is ready to face up to these problems.
And the policy forum called for a national debate.
Because if we're to make the welfare state as popular today as it was when it was set up, we've got to win the support of the people - not just here in this Conference Hall.
Not just in the Party. Or in Parliament. But in the whole country.
I intend to engage in that debate over the next few weeks and months. Which will be grounded in our fundamental values.
Let's discuss how we get a fair deal for people in retirement. How we tackle pensioner poverty. How we help carers. How we tackle exclusion. Just as we say in the Conference document.
But one thing is certain. We cannot stop and stand still.
For eighteen years, people waited for a Labour Government.
They trust us to deliver now. And we will.
We want to be remembered because we had the courage to change what needs to be changed.
Last week marked the beginning of a crusade against poverty.
Governments can make a difference. In 20 years the Tories tripled child poverty. We'll abolish it.
We always knew that welfare reform was going to be difficult. It will be controversial. But we have a clear sense of purpose and direction.
We've made a strong start. We're not complacent. We've only just begun. We're building a new Welfare State for the 21st century.
That's what we promised to do and that's what we'll deliver.
This speech was made at the 1999 Party Conference in Bournemouth. It was made by the then Social Security Secretary (Making him a predecessor to friend of the Labour Club and current Secretary of State for Work and Pensions James Purnell.). That MP, sadly now lost to obscurity,is an alumnus of this very University, one Mr Alistair Darling MP.
Saturday, 6 December 2008
Anne [Begg] supports Minimum Wage change
[Disclaimer]: Aberdeen University and its blog are not connected to Anne Begg MP in an official capacity. The writers of this blog are solely responsible for its contents, and therefore this blog may not reflect the views or positions of Anne Begg MP. For Anne Begg MP's offical website please go to www.annebegg.com.
Last week Laudrup posted an e-mail from Anne Begg the MP for Aberdeen South concerning leafleting today. I managed to crawl out of bed in the early hours (9 a.m.) and somehow made my way down to the meeting point without falling and breaking my neck on the nigh-invisble black ice on the roads. After having spent an hour and a half trying not fall on my arse (Whilst intermittently putting leaflets through people's doors) we made our way back to Anne's house for a very nice lunch which she very kindly put on for us.
During the leafleting I was able to enter into negotiations with a member of her staff about posting local news provided by her Constituency office to this blog. Well to cut a long story short (well actually to cut a short story even shorter) after a brief bidding war between myself and Rupert Murdoch (The BBC dropped out at £50 million) I was able to obtain media broadcast rights (i.e. I'll get an e-mail every Friday.) to what Anne Begg has been doing for her constituents each week. Hopefully this will give you an idea of what's going on in the Aberdeen area and also what a Labour MP does for their constituents.
To finish off, here's a post from Anne Begg's website concerning her stance on the minimum wage change. I think her position is correct, I don't see how it could be justified for an employee to earn less than minimum wage on the grounds that they might make it up in tips.
For those who don't remember the minimum wage was instituted by this Labour government against vociferous opposition from the tories, who opposed this amendment as well.
That's because the tories don't care about ordinary working people, they only care about business men with yearly incomes in six figures.
There's an episode of the Simpsons in which Mr Burns is at a millionaire's club. At the door there's a sign; it reads "you must have at least $1,000,000 to enter". There probably should be a sign at the tories' central office saying the same thing.
On 20th November, Anne welcomed the news that the government intends to change the current minimum wage rules on tipping so that in the future tips will not be used to top up the Minimum Wage. A government consultation started on 19th November to listen to people’s views about exactly how these new proposals would work in practice.
Anne said, "This is a matter of common sense. When you go to a restaurant or to have a hair cut and leave a tip, you expect it to go to the staff on top of their pay, not to be put through the payroll to make up the Minimum Wage.”
“I believe that the government’s announcement will benefit workers throughout Aberdeen South; people we all rely on, but who sometimes don’t have the strongest voice.”
"Rogue employers need to be exposed if they are flouting the system. Therefore, I would encourage anyone that thinks a rogue employer is not paying up to either get in touch with my office on 01224 252 704, or call the national minimum wage helpline on 0845 6000 678.”
As part of the government’s crackdown on those who try to exploit workers, tough new penalties for employers who underpay their staff have been made law under the Employment Act. This will mean that tough new penalties come into force in April, including unlimited fines for the most serious cases rather than the current maximum limit of £5,000. It will also mean a fairer way of dealing with national minimum wage arrears, calculated so workers do not lose out.
It's estimated that 1 million people in the UK currently benefit from the national minimum wage, introduced by the government in 1998. In October this year the minimum wage rates were increased to £5.73 for people aged 22 and over, £4.77 for 18- 21 year olds and £3.53 for 16-17 year olds.
Last week Laudrup posted an e-mail from Anne Begg the MP for Aberdeen South concerning leafleting today. I managed to crawl out of bed in the early hours (9 a.m.) and somehow made my way down to the meeting point without falling and breaking my neck on the nigh-invisble black ice on the roads. After having spent an hour and a half trying not fall on my arse (Whilst intermittently putting leaflets through people's doors) we made our way back to Anne's house for a very nice lunch which she very kindly put on for us.
During the leafleting I was able to enter into negotiations with a member of her staff about posting local news provided by her Constituency office to this blog. Well to cut a long story short (well actually to cut a short story even shorter) after a brief bidding war between myself and Rupert Murdoch (The BBC dropped out at £50 million) I was able to obtain media broadcast rights (i.e. I'll get an e-mail every Friday.) to what Anne Begg has been doing for her constituents each week. Hopefully this will give you an idea of what's going on in the Aberdeen area and also what a Labour MP does for their constituents.
To finish off, here's a post from Anne Begg's website concerning her stance on the minimum wage change. I think her position is correct, I don't see how it could be justified for an employee to earn less than minimum wage on the grounds that they might make it up in tips.
For those who don't remember the minimum wage was instituted by this Labour government against vociferous opposition from the tories, who opposed this amendment as well.
That's because the tories don't care about ordinary working people, they only care about business men with yearly incomes in six figures.
There's an episode of the Simpsons in which Mr Burns is at a millionaire's club. At the door there's a sign; it reads "you must have at least $1,000,000 to enter". There probably should be a sign at the tories' central office saying the same thing.
On 20th November, Anne welcomed the news that the government intends to change the current minimum wage rules on tipping so that in the future tips will not be used to top up the Minimum Wage. A government consultation started on 19th November to listen to people’s views about exactly how these new proposals would work in practice.
Anne said, "This is a matter of common sense. When you go to a restaurant or to have a hair cut and leave a tip, you expect it to go to the staff on top of their pay, not to be put through the payroll to make up the Minimum Wage.”
“I believe that the government’s announcement will benefit workers throughout Aberdeen South; people we all rely on, but who sometimes don’t have the strongest voice.”
"Rogue employers need to be exposed if they are flouting the system. Therefore, I would encourage anyone that thinks a rogue employer is not paying up to either get in touch with my office on 01224 252 704, or call the national minimum wage helpline on 0845 6000 678.”
As part of the government’s crackdown on those who try to exploit workers, tough new penalties for employers who underpay their staff have been made law under the Employment Act. This will mean that tough new penalties come into force in April, including unlimited fines for the most serious cases rather than the current maximum limit of £5,000. It will also mean a fairer way of dealing with national minimum wage arrears, calculated so workers do not lose out.
It's estimated that 1 million people in the UK currently benefit from the national minimum wage, introduced by the government in 1998. In October this year the minimum wage rates were increased to £5.73 for people aged 22 and over, £4.77 for 18- 21 year olds and £3.53 for 16-17 year olds.
A History Lesson
Since its foundation in 1906 the Labour Party has been the most successful party of the left.
Our record is a proud one, the welfare state, Independence for the empire and a continual fight for equality, lets not forget that its under labour that the social reforms of the 60's took place, the death penalty was ended and indeed equal pay and equal rights at work for women became a legislative reality (shame its taking so long for business to realise).
So who were the people who made it possible for a small party elected with 29 seats in 1906 go on to record the largest single party majorities in parliamentary history and change the country that we live in for the better.
so here is part one of the list of Labour Leaders and the length of time that they held office as well as the seat they held in Parliament. Part one deals with 1906-1935.
James Keir Hardie 1 year, 11 months, Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare
Arthur Henderson 2 years, 3 weeks, Barnard Castle
George Barnes 11 months, 3 weeks, Glasgow Blackfriars & Hutchesontow
Ramsay McDonald 3 years, 5 months, Leicester
Arthur Hendersn 3 years, 2 months, Barnard Castle
William Adamson 3 years, 3 months, West Fife
John Robert Clynes 1 year, 9 months, Manchester Platting
Ramsay McDonald 8 years, 9 months, Aberavon then Seaham
Arthur Henderson 1 year, 1 month, Burnley then out of Parliament
George Lansbury 2 years, 11 months, Bow and Bromley
So there is the first part of the list and the interesting thing about it is that Robert Clynes was the first leader not to be Scottish, although Adamson was the only one to represent a Scottish seat he was the 5th Scot to lead the party.
Part 2 will be posted later and then some mini biographies of some of them will be posted.
Our record is a proud one, the welfare state, Independence for the empire and a continual fight for equality, lets not forget that its under labour that the social reforms of the 60's took place, the death penalty was ended and indeed equal pay and equal rights at work for women became a legislative reality (shame its taking so long for business to realise).
So who were the people who made it possible for a small party elected with 29 seats in 1906 go on to record the largest single party majorities in parliamentary history and change the country that we live in for the better.
so here is part one of the list of Labour Leaders and the length of time that they held office as well as the seat they held in Parliament. Part one deals with 1906-1935.
James Keir Hardie 1 year, 11 months, Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare
Arthur Henderson 2 years, 3 weeks, Barnard Castle
George Barnes 11 months, 3 weeks, Glasgow Blackfriars & Hutchesontow
Ramsay McDonald 3 years, 5 months, Leicester
Arthur Hendersn 3 years, 2 months, Barnard Castle
William Adamson 3 years, 3 months, West Fife
John Robert Clynes 1 year, 9 months, Manchester Platting
Ramsay McDonald 8 years, 9 months, Aberavon then Seaham
Arthur Henderson 1 year, 1 month, Burnley then out of Parliament
George Lansbury 2 years, 11 months, Bow and Bromley
So there is the first part of the list and the interesting thing about it is that Robert Clynes was the first leader not to be Scottish, although Adamson was the only one to represent a Scottish seat he was the 5th Scot to lead the party.
Part 2 will be posted later and then some mini biographies of some of them will be posted.
Friday, 5 December 2008
A bit of good news from the Council for a change
From the BBC comes the news that a factory that employs blind and disabled people is to be saved from closing by the council. [I should point out that the reason it was in danger in the first place was because the council cut its funding.]
Isn't amazing though how the council which had to slash its budget can somehow manage to balance the books and pay for things when they're really pushed to. Why not do this for other services in Aberdeen.
And a final note to the story would be to point out who it was that was campaigning to save this great place:
Great work from the Unions as always.
"The troubled Glencraft furniture factory for disabled workers in Aberdeen has had its future secured, according to city council.
The council has agreed to buy the factory and lease it back to the firm.
Glencraft had its funding from the local authority cut as part of an earlier budget settlement.
Negotiations have been taking place since. About 60 staff are employed at the site which could now become home to other social enterprises."
Isn't amazing though how the council which had to slash its budget can somehow manage to balance the books and pay for things when they're really pushed to. Why not do this for other services in Aberdeen.
And a final note to the story would be to point out who it was that was campaigning to save this great place:
Union leaders plan factory fight
Union leaders representing staff at an Aberdeen workshop for the blind and disabled hope to legally challenge the council's decision to cut its subsidy.
If the £650,000 subsidy goes, the Glencraft factory which employs 60 people will have to close, possibly as early as April.
Aberdeen Council said it would try to help those who could not find work.
National officials from the Community union are meeting workers to discuss how to save the factory.
Great work from the Unions as always.
The Takeover Begins
Just a quick post to thank the Bickerstaffe Record and Birmingham University Labour Students for including us on their blogrolls. This is just the kind of co-operation that will help Labour bloggers to increase our web presence. It does this by two main mechanisms, the first is simply that the more websites link to your blog the more people will get a chance to hear about it. And secondly related again to linking is that the more links to a page or website the higher up the page you are in search engines like google.
Not forgetting of course the simple fact that having connections between bloggers facilitates the passing of information and stories across blogs. And the passing of information is vital if we are going to ensure that we get the word out about Labour's work and achievements in government.
Not forgetting of course the simple fact that having connections between bloggers facilitates the passing of information and stories across blogs. And the passing of information is vital if we are going to ensure that we get the word out about Labour's work and achievements in government.
No He Can't
I have just been reading the New Statesman online and found this story concerning David Cameron and his love fest with Barack Obama .....NOT.
It seems that He is a lightweight, well we knew that, and rather than the next generation he is nothing more than a right wing eurosceptic.
It seems that He is a lightweight, well we knew that, and rather than the next generation he is nothing more than a right wing eurosceptic.
Thursday, 4 December 2008
I Make a Prediction
Over the last year I have been telling everyone that would listen that the Labour Party would win the next election by at least 31 seats. I have been laughed at, told not to be stupid and reminded that miracles don't happen, but as I have told members of the Parliamentary Labour Party trust me I know how we can do it.
So here it is the strategy to win the election by at least 31 seats, its simple really GET THE VOTE OUT, REMIND THEM WHAT THE TORIES ARE LIKE oh aye and govern effectively.
Now on the first part people no longer appear to be scared to say that they are voting Labour and that is thanks to the latter. And I have to say who needs to remind the country as to what a Tory government would be like as they are just doing that themselves (so thanks David, George and Damien).
But its not just that it is also based on a falling Libdem vote and that is happening as well so I stand by my prediction, but what has led me to posting it here in the blog, well that is thanks to a Comres opinion poll which puts Labour 1% behind the Tories and gives us a majority of 10 seats but even better than that is the lead was a 1% lead for labour it would win by Wait for it 32 seats so OK not my 31 but not bad for the big guy.
So here it is the strategy to win the election by at least 31 seats, its simple really GET THE VOTE OUT, REMIND THEM WHAT THE TORIES ARE LIKE oh aye and govern effectively.
Now on the first part people no longer appear to be scared to say that they are voting Labour and that is thanks to the latter. And I have to say who needs to remind the country as to what a Tory government would be like as they are just doing that themselves (so thanks David, George and Damien).
But its not just that it is also based on a falling Libdem vote and that is happening as well so I stand by my prediction, but what has led me to posting it here in the blog, well that is thanks to a Comres opinion poll which puts Labour 1% behind the Tories and gives us a majority of 10 seats but even better than that is the lead was a 1% lead for labour it would win by Wait for it 32 seats so OK not my 31 but not bad for the big guy.
Peter's going to have a flash new neighbour.
Trump to site home at golf resort
Maybe they can go to the pub together or take their dogs for a walk through the (unfortunately crap strewn, not really :P)local parks. Or not...
I think the important phrase there is Scottish family home, maybe some will disagree but I don't consider one house of however many dozens he has to be his home. Your home is where you live, what's the betting that Trump will spend at most a couple of weeks there every year if that. This isn't a home it's a very exclusive hotel room that he'll use whenever he wants to play a round at the golf course or he needs to promote the houses he's going to have to sell.
Oh and a note to Peter, having looked on google maps I realise there's a distance between Balmeide and where you live but I liked this story so I'm not going to edit it.:P
Having said all that I'm now going to point out a positive:
There two pluses for me there, firstly the fact that he's going to give his business to local workers and secondly (presuming of course the restoration is done properly) the fact that a 14th century building is going to be restored. I think it's important to preserve some of the beautiful old buildings we have in this country and it's nice to see it being done even if I'm not exactly hot on his development plans.
Laudrup has mentioned issues related to this story before.
Maybe they can go to the pub together or take their dogs for a walk through the (unfortunately crap strewn, not really :P)local parks. Or not...
US tycoon Donald Trump has announced he is to make his Scottish family home at his controversial £1bn Aberdeenshire golf resort.
The property tycoon is to convert Menie House on the Menie Estate near Balmedie into a personal residence.
I think the important phrase there is Scottish family home, maybe some will disagree but I don't consider one house of however many dozens he has to be his home. Your home is where you live, what's the betting that Trump will spend at most a couple of weeks there every year if that. This isn't a home it's a very exclusive hotel room that he'll use whenever he wants to play a round at the golf course or he needs to promote the houses he's going to have to sell.
Oh and a note to Peter, having looked on google maps I realise there's a distance between Balmeide and where you live but I liked this story so I'm not going to edit it.:P
Having said all that I'm now going to point out a positive:
He has hired a number of local companies to renovate and restore the 14th Century building.
There two pluses for me there, firstly the fact that he's going to give his business to local workers and secondly (presuming of course the restoration is done properly) the fact that a 14th century building is going to be restored. I think it's important to preserve some of the beautiful old buildings we have in this country and it's nice to see it being done even if I'm not exactly hot on his development plans.
Laudrup has mentioned issues related to this story before.
This has nothing to do with politics
And it has nothing to do with the Aberdeen University Labour Club but I'm going to post it anyway. Why? I'm posting it because of the sheer beauty of the spectacle and I just had to share it.
It's an online advent calendar from the Boston Globe's Big Picture feature, it's made up of images taken by the Hubble Space telescope such as this one:
Enjoy.
It's an online advent calendar from the Boston Globe's Big Picture feature, it's made up of images taken by the Hubble Space telescope such as this one:
Enjoy.
Wednesday, 3 December 2008
This is for the Musical lovers
It's absolutely brilliant and hilarious whilst making a very serious point. I love it and I hope you will too.
See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die
The Queens Speech
Here is a short film from The Prime Minister about todays Queen Speech. A programme for the next year that puts people first and not the mega rich that the tories seem to be more concerned about.
Who is your Labour Leader
Last weekend at the Scottish Labour Students conference, a conference where I had the honour of becoming Vice Chair of this great organisation, we had a discussion over some fermented pear juice to discuss who was the greatest Labour leader.
Some believed it was Tony Blair, others Gordon Brown and at least one John Smith (I wonder who that was). What is clear is that you relate to the leader who helped you find your political legs.
Many SLS members joined the party under Tony Blair and to those members he is the man who defined their politics, some have joined in the last year and for them Gordon Brown has helped them find out who they are politically.
In my case I joined the party when Neil Kinnock was leader, at a time when the big fight was not against the tories but for the heart and soul of the party, but it was with the election of John Smith as leader that I can honestly say that I found my Labour Party feet.
His vision of a Britain with social justice at its core, a Britian where co-operation was at its heart and a Britain that would be at the heart of europe leading he fight for a better world.
Now even though lots of what John advocated Tony Blair delivered on and I rejoiced at every one there were times when even I could say that he had taken decisions that I did not agree with and even though John Smith was leader for only 2 years I can honestly say that I agreed with every decision he made.
His death was something that had a profound effect on me as just a few months before he left us I had the pleasure of spending a few hours in his company and realised that this was a guy who actually believed and wanted to achieve everything he was saying, a bit Like Gordon is now.
So the question is: Who do you think your Labour leader was?
Some believed it was Tony Blair, others Gordon Brown and at least one John Smith (I wonder who that was). What is clear is that you relate to the leader who helped you find your political legs.
Many SLS members joined the party under Tony Blair and to those members he is the man who defined their politics, some have joined in the last year and for them Gordon Brown has helped them find out who they are politically.
In my case I joined the party when Neil Kinnock was leader, at a time when the big fight was not against the tories but for the heart and soul of the party, but it was with the election of John Smith as leader that I can honestly say that I found my Labour Party feet.
His vision of a Britain with social justice at its core, a Britian where co-operation was at its heart and a Britain that would be at the heart of europe leading he fight for a better world.
Now even though lots of what John advocated Tony Blair delivered on and I rejoiced at every one there were times when even I could say that he had taken decisions that I did not agree with and even though John Smith was leader for only 2 years I can honestly say that I agreed with every decision he made.
His death was something that had a profound effect on me as just a few months before he left us I had the pleasure of spending a few hours in his company and realised that this was a guy who actually believed and wanted to achieve everything he was saying, a bit Like Gordon is now.
So the question is: Who do you think your Labour leader was?
Blogorama II: Though Cowards Flinch
“We all know what happens to those who stand in the middle of the road — they get run down.” - Aneurin Bevan
For the second Blogorama we're covering a blog run by a group of young bloggers called "Though Cowards Flinch". They write very intelligent and thought provoking articles on a variety of political subjects. For example here skewering the Right's ridiculous use of political correctness:
More and more it seems that the term “politically correct” is a bludgeon to be arbitrarily wielded against the entire Left, simply by virtue of being Left. The wonder of the whole thing is the implicit manner in which this construct of faulty reasoning is attempted: lefties are against hunting so it is politically incorrect. Lefties are scroungers, so having a job is politically incorrect. Lefties love abortion, so opposing it is politically incorrect.
Miles uses ‘political correctness’ at one point as a means of referring to toeing a line of consensus, in which case all creeds of politics are in some form guilty of political correctness and the term becomes essentially meaningless. She also uses it in the ideological sense mentioned above, reducing it to a doctrinaire battle-cry for the Right. No doubt the woolly thinking of Miles hasn’t considered quite so deeply this question, since beside such vacuous utterances on political correctness, she can record how she hates that Palin’s daughter is a cheerleader.
As a feminist I particularly appreciate their articles on gender issues, and I'm sure that those West Wing fans in the Labour Club will appreciate the reference in their recent article on polling.
From a blogging perspective they seem to hold the same goals as this blog; to create a community of bloggers, and to improve the efficiency of the disbursement of information by the Labour Party, and to raise the level of participation of members. The internet holds a myriad of opportunities to draw people together and allow people to interact without the logistical difficulties of time and place. It also a fantastic tool to teach people about our ideals, goals and achievements and in the process increase our supporter base and fundraising potential.
They make these points and more in this about on the use of "New Media". An especially vexing problem for bloggers, especially as compared to traditional media outlets which have large staffs and fact finders spread all around the country, is their difficulty in being able to get information about industrial disputes and other important events across the country. It is this fundamental stumbling block that can be overcome by the simple means of co-operation between bloggers in geographically disperse bloggers. However saying it can be overcome belies the difficulty of effectively co-ordinating a large group of people all of whom have differing levels of information and time available to participate. It is this difficulty that I hope to tackle working for the Scottish Labour Students Committee.
This spirit of co-operativity is summed up best in the penultimate paragraph:
These are some of the opportunities offered by heightened communication between bloggers and by the additional technology open to us through Web 2.0. I’d like the opinion of some of my fellow bloggers on just these subjects, so I’m going to tap Peter Kenyon, Mil, Paul [That's last week's blogorama subject and the person who suggested Though Cowards Flinch], Susan, Tom, Stroppybird and Penny for their own comments or articles, because I think each of them will have a distinctive point of view ranging from those of feminists to community activists to internet-lovers to ideologically aware Marxists. Also, The Yorkshire Ranter seems to have given this some thought already.
They also covered some of the same stories as this blog, take for example the releasing of the BNPs list of
So why not head over there and see what you think for yourself. On a final note I found Though Cowards Flinch through being recommended it by a poster in the comments of last weeks blogorama, if anyone else has ideas for blogs we can cover or just interesting blogs in general please do tell us.
Tuesday, 2 December 2008
Christmas blood shortage warning
Some less than cheerful news from the BBC this holiday season on the problem caused by a drop in blood donation before Christmas:
Donating blood is a fantastic thing and it's one very easy way to make a tangible difference in the life of a stranger.
But...
If you get a tatoo of visit a country that has a high incidence of malaria you cannot donate blood for a year. If you have unprotected sex with a woman or if you're a woman you have unprotected sex with a man you can donate, no problem. However if you are a man and you have sex with a man (It doesn't matter if it's protected sex or not.) you are banned from ever donating blood. To some this policy is justifiable; gay men do have a higher chance of having HIV than other groups. However when you look at the risks this assessment is shown to be fundamentally flawed:
I don't like having to employ caveats when I'm talking about something as selfless as blood donation, an act which is uncompensated and is to help someone that the donor will never meet. But i feel in this case it is necessary, the National Blood Service is discriminating against a group of people using very shaky reasoning and that weakens their ability to fulfill their purpose.
I have found an online petition that aims to convince the NBS to overturn their ban, I have signed it and I hope you will too.
Oh, and if you want to give blood in Aberdeen you can go to the Aberdeen Blood Donor Centre. There should be a chance to donate on campus in the near future but I couldn't find anything online, some organisations need to be a bit more internet savvy.
"More people need to give blood to avoid a 50% drop in donations over the festive period, the Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service has warned.
The service said donations fell by 25% during the same period in 2007.
It fears the situation could be worse this year because Christmas falls on a Thursday, the most popular day for giving blood."
Donating blood is a fantastic thing and it's one very easy way to make a tangible difference in the life of a stranger.
But...
"If you have ever had gay sex, the NHS considers your blood contaminated for life."
If you get a tatoo of visit a country that has a high incidence of malaria you cannot donate blood for a year. If you have unprotected sex with a woman or if you're a woman you have unprotected sex with a man you can donate, no problem. However if you are a man and you have sex with a man (It doesn't matter if it's protected sex or not.) you are banned from ever donating blood. To some this policy is justifiable; gay men do have a higher chance of having HIV than other groups. However when you look at the risks this assessment is shown to be fundamentally flawed:
"The US epidemiologist and bio-ethicist Dr Scott Halpern crunched the figures for the court. Some 1 in 100 people who are infused with blood older than 14 days will die – and 13 per cent of infused blood offered by the Red Cross is older than that. This, he explained, poses a risk "thousands of times greater" than "the very worst predictions of HIV infection" if you let latex-loving gay men donate. Why? Because if the ban is lifted and gay men who practice safe sex are allowed to donate, a single HIV-positive blood donation will slip through clinical screening once every 5,769 years. That's one time between now and the year 7777 – or equivalent to it happening once since 3761 BC, when cities had not yet been invented."
I don't like having to employ caveats when I'm talking about something as selfless as blood donation, an act which is uncompensated and is to help someone that the donor will never meet. But i feel in this case it is necessary, the National Blood Service is discriminating against a group of people using very shaky reasoning and that weakens their ability to fulfill their purpose.
I have found an online petition that aims to convince the NBS to overturn their ban, I have signed it and I hope you will too.
Oh, and if you want to give blood in Aberdeen you can go to the Aberdeen Blood Donor Centre. There should be a chance to donate on campus in the near future but I couldn't find anything online, some organisations need to be a bit more internet savvy.
Congratulations to the Tenants
The following article appeared in the Press and Journal and was sent to me by my friends at the co-op party so a big thanks to both.
ABERDEEN-BASED Tenants First Housing Co-operative has been named runner-up for a prestigious National Home Improvement Council Award which recognises significant achievements in the UK housing arena.
Britain's largest fully mutual housing co-operative was nominated for the award for best brownfield or recycled building project, focusing on its recently completed Roanheads development in Peterhead.
The former fish-factory site was previously turned down by a variety of contractors put off by considerable levels of hydrocarbon contamination in the ground.
Tenants First saw the site as a prime development opportunity and, following a six-month demolition and clean-up, it now accommodates 45 purpose-built family homes and eight sheltered houses.
The development is also a Homezone project, an initiative which aims to reclaim residential streets back from traffic, with streets designed to encourage walking, cycling and community activity.
ABERDEEN-BASED Tenants First Housing Co-operative has been named runner-up for a prestigious National Home Improvement Council Award which recognises significant achievements in the UK housing arena.
Britain's largest fully mutual housing co-operative was nominated for the award for best brownfield or recycled building project, focusing on its recently completed Roanheads development in Peterhead.
The former fish-factory site was previously turned down by a variety of contractors put off by considerable levels of hydrocarbon contamination in the ground.
Tenants First saw the site as a prime development opportunity and, following a six-month demolition and clean-up, it now accommodates 45 purpose-built family homes and eight sheltered houses.
The development is also a Homezone project, an initiative which aims to reclaim residential streets back from traffic, with streets designed to encourage walking, cycling and community activity.
We Broke 1000
At the bottom of the page we have a counter which as you can see is now showing over 1000 hits on the site. The counter was put up a couple of weeks into the life of the blog so the number of hits we have had will be higher still.
While its our first thousand we hope that it wont be the last and that we reach the next thousand hits faster than we got this one.
So from me to everyone who has posted, contributed and just offered support a big thanks.
While its our first thousand we hope that it wont be the last and that we reach the next thousand hits faster than we got this one.
So from me to everyone who has posted, contributed and just offered support a big thanks.
Monday, 1 December 2008
A Co-op Solution
Some of the readers of this blog might know that I am a member of the 2 great left of centre political parties in this great nation of ours.
They are the Labour Party, well it is a labour club blog, as well as the Co-operative Party a party that was founded in 1917 and has been working since then to advocate the Co-operative and Mutual agenda at the heart of the political agenda.
As part of that process last week the General Secretary of the Co-operative Party Michael Stephenson had the following article in the Guardian making the case for the mutualisation of the banking sector.
Of all the numerous and painful lessons of the recent collapse in the financial markets, one has been conspicuously missing from the flood of media analysis and commentary.
Bradford & Bingley's taxpayer-funded rescue ended all arguments about the potential benefits of demutualisation. As the last of the ex-building societies loses its independence, it joins other recent arrivals such as Northern Rock and Halifax as the latest addition to this run of corporate failure.
When the last Conservative government encouraged societies to demutualise through the 1986 Building Societies Act, it plundered generations of assets from mutual societies, replacing prudent mortgage providers with some of the worst culprits of casino capitalism.
Today we have a unique and unmissable opportunity to put that right. By recognising the enormous benefits of mutuality and taking action to allow societies to remutualise, we can return those institutions to their rightful position and bring stability and sustainability to the important work they can do for our economy and the millions of Britons who rely on them.
Cooperatives and mutual financial organisations differ from their plc competitors in one crucial respect: they exist to provide mutual self-help for their members rather than to generate profits for investors. These core values drive high standards of behaviour throughout the sector. The absence of external shareholders means there are no conflicts of interest between the claims of consumers and owners, leaving mutuals no incentive to exploit their customers for short-term gain.
In addition, the fact that these organisations operate democratic voting systems, on a one member one vote basis, allows them to take a long-term view of their members' interests. As we collectively count the costs of our financial institutions' previous short-term thinking, this approach to business should unquestionably be the future direction that we are looking for.
A starting point will be the future of Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley. While the government was absolutely right to nationalise these as a short-term measure, any long-term solution for these companies should be based on some key principles.
• Taxpayers must not be out of pocket as a result of the change.
• Hard-working families and small businesses must be protected. This means the housing market should not be closed to first-time buyers, credit lines to small business should be extended and repossessions should only occur as a last resort.
• The institutions that emerge must be secure, responsible and add to the financial stability of the UK economy.
• And finally, these new organisations must continue to act in the long-term interests of their consumers.
That is why the Co-operative party is calling for the newly nationalised banks to be converted into mutuals. Mutual ownership is the best solution for ensuring a stable long-term future for these companies, and making sure that the risk taken by taxpayers will deliver for consumers in the long-term.
Building societies were founded with one purpose in mind – that of building houses for hard-working families and providing a safe place for them to deposit their savings. It is only fitting that the chief purpose of these businesses should be to do the same, particularly at a time when people are anxious about the security of their savings and will find it increasingly hard to get on the housing ladder.
This could be achieved in two ways. The government could give existing financial mutuals the right of first refusal when it decides to put the institutions it nationalised up for sale. This would maximise the opportunity for a strengthening of the existing mutual sector and help ensure a stability and continuity in the market.
Alternatively, the government could consolidate Northern Rock and its holding in Bradford & Bingley into one institution. When all debts are paid back, the institution could be converted into a building society. This should be straightforward, as the government already owns the share capital. The new body would operate in the same manner as any other building society.
Regardless of which option is chosen, the opportunity is there to rectify the mistakes of the past and deal with one of the major economic and social challenges of our time.
They are the Labour Party, well it is a labour club blog, as well as the Co-operative Party a party that was founded in 1917 and has been working since then to advocate the Co-operative and Mutual agenda at the heart of the political agenda.
As part of that process last week the General Secretary of the Co-operative Party Michael Stephenson had the following article in the Guardian making the case for the mutualisation of the banking sector.
Of all the numerous and painful lessons of the recent collapse in the financial markets, one has been conspicuously missing from the flood of media analysis and commentary.
Bradford & Bingley's taxpayer-funded rescue ended all arguments about the potential benefits of demutualisation. As the last of the ex-building societies loses its independence, it joins other recent arrivals such as Northern Rock and Halifax as the latest addition to this run of corporate failure.
When the last Conservative government encouraged societies to demutualise through the 1986 Building Societies Act, it plundered generations of assets from mutual societies, replacing prudent mortgage providers with some of the worst culprits of casino capitalism.
Today we have a unique and unmissable opportunity to put that right. By recognising the enormous benefits of mutuality and taking action to allow societies to remutualise, we can return those institutions to their rightful position and bring stability and sustainability to the important work they can do for our economy and the millions of Britons who rely on them.
Cooperatives and mutual financial organisations differ from their plc competitors in one crucial respect: they exist to provide mutual self-help for their members rather than to generate profits for investors. These core values drive high standards of behaviour throughout the sector. The absence of external shareholders means there are no conflicts of interest between the claims of consumers and owners, leaving mutuals no incentive to exploit their customers for short-term gain.
In addition, the fact that these organisations operate democratic voting systems, on a one member one vote basis, allows them to take a long-term view of their members' interests. As we collectively count the costs of our financial institutions' previous short-term thinking, this approach to business should unquestionably be the future direction that we are looking for.
A starting point will be the future of Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley. While the government was absolutely right to nationalise these as a short-term measure, any long-term solution for these companies should be based on some key principles.
• Taxpayers must not be out of pocket as a result of the change.
• Hard-working families and small businesses must be protected. This means the housing market should not be closed to first-time buyers, credit lines to small business should be extended and repossessions should only occur as a last resort.
• The institutions that emerge must be secure, responsible and add to the financial stability of the UK economy.
• And finally, these new organisations must continue to act in the long-term interests of their consumers.
That is why the Co-operative party is calling for the newly nationalised banks to be converted into mutuals. Mutual ownership is the best solution for ensuring a stable long-term future for these companies, and making sure that the risk taken by taxpayers will deliver for consumers in the long-term.
Building societies were founded with one purpose in mind – that of building houses for hard-working families and providing a safe place for them to deposit their savings. It is only fitting that the chief purpose of these businesses should be to do the same, particularly at a time when people are anxious about the security of their savings and will find it increasingly hard to get on the housing ladder.
This could be achieved in two ways. The government could give existing financial mutuals the right of first refusal when it decides to put the institutions it nationalised up for sale. This would maximise the opportunity for a strengthening of the existing mutual sector and help ensure a stability and continuity in the market.
Alternatively, the government could consolidate Northern Rock and its holding in Bradford & Bingley into one institution. When all debts are paid back, the institution could be converted into a building society. This should be straightforward, as the government already owns the share capital. The new body would operate in the same manner as any other building society.
Regardless of which option is chosen, the opportunity is there to rectify the mistakes of the past and deal with one of the major economic and social challenges of our time.
A Fine Public Servant from Aberdeenshire
The BBC reports on the recognition of the fantastic and devoted service given by a Special Constable from Aberdeenshire. Bob Ballantyne has faithfully served the community for 28 years, including over 200 weekends in a row, and for this he has been awarded the Queen's medal. He is the first volunteer officer to win the award.
He said: "It's a great honour and I am very flattered. It was quite a surprise.
"However, policing is about team work and this award is as much a testament to the hard work of those I have served with in Grampian Police over the last 28 years as it is to me.
"I would highly recommend the specials to anyone who wants to give something back to the local community." "
Our Club Secretary will be pleased to see that the Special in question is from Ellon.
Social Workers In The Sun
Social Workers do an important but much maligned job in today's society. When they take a child away from potential abuse they're portrayed as draconean child-snatchers, if a child dies at the hands of abuser then they have "Blood on their hands".
The issue is covered well by The Bickerstaffe Record.
It is the consistent and deliberate policy of the tabloid press to whip up discontent and foment discord about "issues". It seems that reporting the events is no longer enough, they have to shape situations to their liking. The responsibility to keep the public well informed has taken a back seat to reinforcing prejudice and provoking anger against people who have no way to defend themselves against such a barrage.
The death of this young child is tragic (Although given the ongoing carnage in the Congo being funded and mostly provoked by resources that are bought by consumer in the west maybe the British press should look at their priorities.) but to wildly swing the axe doesn't help anyone and can in fact be counter productive to the cause:
The Sun and its ilk don't care about social issues, they just care about whipping their readers into a frenzy and ensuring their loyalty to the newspaper. That's not good enough for an organisation that is supposed to be informing people.
"Social workers are damned either way. If they take children into care, they represent an intrusive, authoritarian state destroying family life. If they don't, they represent a lax, uncaring state failing to protect defenceless tots. A trawl of newspaper websites suggests that one or other of these stories gets reported about twice a month, with wronged parents slightly more common than wronged children. Wronged social workers don't exist.[Source:The Guardian]"
The issue is covered well by The Bickerstaffe Record.
If you are intent, as The Sun is clearly intent, on stirring up mass hyteria; if you are intent on creating a mass hatred of all things ’social work’ so deep that a challenging but highly rewarding profession sees massive drops in recruitment and retention; if you are really ‘care so deeply ’ about children’s justice that you’re quite happy to see the numbers in care rise dramatically in the two weeks since you started your ‘campaign for justice’; if you want to do all these things, you might at least start by getting your bleeding facts right.
It is the consistent and deliberate policy of the tabloid press to whip up discontent and foment discord about "issues". It seems that reporting the events is no longer enough, they have to shape situations to their liking. The responsibility to keep the public well informed has taken a back seat to reinforcing prejudice and provoking anger against people who have no way to defend themselves against such a barrage.
The death of this young child is tragic (Although given the ongoing carnage in the Congo being funded and mostly provoked by resources that are bought by consumer in the west maybe the British press should look at their priorities.) but to wildly swing the axe doesn't help anyone and can in fact be counter productive to the cause:
"Lots of people, for example, have said that Sharon Shoesmith, Director of Children's and Young People's Services in Haringey, ought to resign - she's in charge, so she is to blame. But here's what 68 headteachers have to say about her work:
“Should the Child P case result in her loss from the borough, then our children and young people will lose one of their most effective, determined and committed champions.”
“Initially, in her role of director of education, Shoesmith transformed a demoralised education service, derided by many headteachers, into one with which we are now proud to be associated.
“The exceptional rate of improvement of many of the borough’s schools would not have been possible without the support of the service that Ms Shoesmith rebuilt, revitalised and led.
“Since more recently becoming the director of Haringey’s Children and Young People’s Service, Shoesmith has continued to work relentlessly and with a determination that the service she leads and develops ensures best practice in providing education, care, support and protection for all of our young people.”"[Source:Don Paskini]
The Sun and its ilk don't care about social issues, they just care about whipping their readers into a frenzy and ensuring their loyalty to the newspaper. That's not good enough for an organisation that is supposed to be informing people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
