Conservative Comment

So That's What A Democratic Right Feels Like...

2009-06-04T08:32:00.000Z

Right. Quick update - finished exams and hopefully will spend a bit more time on this. In the meantime, resignations, reshuffles and dodgy expenses have all happened at the most inconvenient time for Mr. Brown. The kicking he will get today will surely send his leadership of this country into the long grass. If he comes fourth behind UKIP in the European (Union) elections, then that must surely be that.

Speaking of which, I have just cast my first two votes. One in the local County Council elections and one in the Europeans. I hope that those who I voted for live up to their expectations.

It seems that due to the spontaneous combustion of Labour, we may well have a majority of eurosceptic parties in the British delegation to the European Parliament. Such parties would be in two groups - Independence and Democracy (UKIP) and the Movement for Democratic Change (Conservatives). If the BNP get one elected I don't think they would be welcome in either. If the other predominantly eurosceptic countries - Poland, Czech Republic, maybe Ireland, elect at least a rump of eurosceptic MEPs, we could have a real opposition in the EP. We are almost there with the current configuration of seats, but Ind-Dem is too small to get enough floor-speaking time and committee positions.

Anyway, my predictions for the European elections:
Conservatives - 36%
UKIP - 21%
Lib Dems - 20%
Labour - 18%
Others - 5%

A College Coup

2009-04-21T14:58:00.000Z

Yesterday I received a fantastic e-mail from someone in charge about not hogging seats in exam term in the Library. Something about its language tells you this could only come from a Cambridge College:

3. students who find a desk unused for more than 15 minutes are at liberty to stage a coup; but please leave the displaced books nearby;

All punctuated with exciting punctuation as well!

Are CCTV Cameras To Be Encouraged In A Liberal Democracy?

2009-04-16T08:03:00.000Z

We hear, largely from very Liberal parties, that Britain is becoming a police state due to the volume of CCTV cameras around. No-one is safe, they say, because the state can see where everyone is at any one time. State spying has no limits. But it is also interesting to ponder on the ways that CCTV has of strengthening a liberal democracy like our own. The principle of accountability is the way in which it does this.

CCTV helps to prevent abuses by organs of the state. In the G20 protests that recently happened in London, good hard evidence of police brutality is hard to come by. But the CCTV cameras caught a lot of the abuses, and will undoubtedly play a major part in any civil or criminal trial (although I think there was probably no criminal liability). So CCTV can increase scrutiny of the actions of the police as well as those of ordinary citizens.

CCTV can act as a deterrent for crime. If people know that they are likely to be caught on CCTV, then surely they will think twice about committing a crime in front of the camera? Also, CCTV is of use in both finding and prosecuting offenders, ensuring an effective criminal justice system.

Surely the sentiment that the innocent have nothing to hide is applicable here. If one does not get into trouble routinely, then why should one be worried if one is filmed walking along the High Street? The universality of CCTV, rather than being criticised because it treats upstanding and criminal citizens alike, should be celebrated precisely because no-one is above the law of CCTV. The difference is that some people do things they would not like to have on record, or on camera.

So rather than signalling the death-knell of democracy, an independent CCTV network can, I believe, strengthen our liberal democracy by providing greater accountability for all persons, be they police, criminals or the general public.

Why The Court Of Public Opinion Is A Bad Thing

2009-03-06T15:54:00.000Z

In the heat of the discussion over the pension of Sir Fred Goodwin, Harriet Harman let slip this phrase:

"It might be enforceable in a court of law this contract, but it's not enforceable in the court of public opinion and that's where the government steps in."

It seems to me that this is a very worrying thing to say.
If Sir Fred's contract is formally valid, then presumably the only way that the Government could stop the pension is by an Act of Parliament. Parliament has the authority to do this; Dicey once famously said that the only thing Parliament could not do was bind its successors. The doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty is not under discussion here, indeed I would argue that Parliament has never been sovereign. But if Parliament were to do this, the legislation would probably have to be retrospective, that is, to outlaw something that has already happened. It has happened before, for example in the War Damage Act 1965.

But it is a dangerous path. If Parliament makes something illegal tomorrow retrospectively when it was committed today, then we live in uncertainty as to what is culpable conduct today. In short, the law becomes a mess, allowing Government to act arbitrarily, for example by passing a law saying anyone who went to a football match yesterday is guilty of an offence. Also, people need to know what the law is today so that they can make a conscious decision to act within or without the law. Retrospective action denies the autonomy of the individual to decide to act in a lawful or unlawful manner at the time. The principle of non-retrospectivity is therefore too important to tinker with even in isolated cases.

This is where the "court of public opinion" comes in. The justification that Labour are claiming for such grossly unconstitutional action is that the public demands, so the government must act. So the Government feel required to act contrary to established principles of good law for the sake of public approval. Such an idea is dangerous and should not take root in government. We have ideas as to what makes good law for a reason, and it is precisely so that a government cannot act arbitrarily or retrospectively on a whim.

Please can we hear no more of this court of public opinion? It's not worth sacrificing our Constitutional principles for the sake of approval ratings.

The Character Of Law

2009-01-06T08:26:00.000Z

Every so often, I seem to think of something that I'm interested in, often completely independent from the world's news, that I write as an article on this site. This is one of those cases, although it could also be accurately described as an attempt to avoid doing any work on the Roman law of contract.

Law, in order to serve its purpose of regulating behaviour in society by laying down certain moral standards, must have certain characteristics. These will be commented on below

Law must be fair. This is concerned with procedural fairness, so that the law does not have different rules for different people depending on their status, for example. There must not be arbitrary discrimination, as recognised by the House of Lords in A v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] 2 AC 68. Here, they held that holding foreign nationals without trial could not be justified on grounds of preventing terrorism, as British citizens would not be subject to the same laws even if they posed a greater terrorist threat. Dicey used the words "all are equal before the law."

Law must be just. This is to be distinguished from fairness in that fairness ensures procedural fairness, but justice is concerned with the outcome of the case. Procedural fairness means that a law is correctly applied, but an unjust law could be applied fairly, but still be unjust. The same rules regarding procedural fairness should be applied to the substantive law as well as the application of it, so that law should not introduce arbitrary discrimination. But there is no mechanism, apart from Parliament, to ensure just laws are passed. In theory, the judiciary has to interpret the Acts of Parliament consistently with the will of Parliament. But it is possible that the judiciary could use its interpretative power to put a just interpretation on an unjust statute, thus correcting the injustice. Various senior judges have said this is a possibility.

Law must be clear. By this it is meant that it must be easily accessible, non-retrospective and no duplication of offences. The first two are well-established principles, as it is obvious that the law must be understandable and criminalising acts retrospectively falls foul of the idea of a just legal system. The third one, is in my view, the most interesting.

To take an example, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 made a raft of new criminal offences, from rape downwards. But so many of these offences overlap, so the same facts could be charged to many offences, all of comparable seriousness. Let us take the facts of R v G [2008] UKHL 37, where a 15 year old boy had consensual sex with a 12 year old girl. The girl had told the boy she was 15. The boy was convicted under section 5, rape of a child under 13 [max life]. But he could also have been charged and convicted on these facts under section 6 (assault of a child under 13 by penetration [max life]) or section 8 (causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity [max life]). By far the broadest crime is the last one, but note that they all carry the same maximum penalty, life imprisonment. As the other two crimes are subsets of the third crime, I propose to repeal s.5 and s.6, as they are surplus to requirements. Any facts falling into these cases can just as well be charged under s.8, without any defendants getting off scot free. I propose that the higher states of fault required for the s.5 and s.6 crimes be taken into account when sentencing, but proved during the trial.

To summarise, law must be clear, fair and just. Clearness leads to simplicity, which is the major flaw with legislation passed over the last 15 years. I hope that there is a reevaluation of law as a simple and clear moral code, applied by principles of fairness, to lead to a just substantive result.

What A Thing To Write About

2008-12-29T08:07:00.001Z

In the "Legal History" section of a second-hand book website, there is a copy of the report of the Longford Committee Investigating Pornography, a radical committee made up of MPs, prominent members of the public, and various others. They published this (I think) in the 1970s. What amused me was the description of the condition of the book:

Cover slightly grubby & a little creased at corners, pages slightly browned at edges.

Considering the subject matter, quite appropriate really!

A Twist On An Old Favourite

2008-12-17T11:34:00.000Z

Are spam e-mails not quite amusing?

Attn: Beneficiary,

I found your name in the Central Computer among the list of unpaid (Contractors, Inheritance next of kin and lotto beneficiaries that was originated from American, Europe, Asia plus Middle east and Africans) among the list of individuals and companies that your unpaid fund has been located to the Standard Chartered Bank, HSBC, Barclays Bank, Natwest Bank, Bank of America, Eco Bank Nigeria plc and CBN Plus ATM payment. Your name appeared among the beneficiaries who will receive a part-payment of US$15.5 million and has been approved already for months. You are requested to get back to me for more direction and instruction on how to receive your fund. 
 
However, we received an email from one Dr. Robert Walter who told us that he is your next of kin and that you died in a car accident last week. 
 
Dr Robert Walter account co-ordinate as follows:
 
Bank of Lebanon

Beneficiary: Dr Robert Water 
 
He has also submitted his account for us to transfer the fund to him. We want to hear from you before we can make the transfer to confirm if you are dead or not. Once again, I apologize to you on behalf Of IMF (International Monetary Fund) failure to receive your funds in time, which according to records in the system had been long overdue. contact me via my email address:  
Yours Sincerely,
 
 
Finance Department Director 
International Monetary Fund. IMF

Apart from the dodgy grammar in places, it was a novel idea. This is the first message I have received with someone "claiming" to be next of kin, when in fact he is not. Normally, you are labelled as next of kin of a deceased relative, email me your bank details to collect your fund, please. The end is the same, but the means of getting there is different. Note how my next of kin's name changes in the two times it is mentioned. If Dr Walter/Water is reading this, he can have my share of the $15.5m.

What Rock-Bottom Interest Rates Means To Me

2008-12-04T16:39:00.000Z

Absolutely nothing.

Let me explain. Over the summer, I set up a fixed 6% interest ISA, meaning that even though interest rates are now at 2%, I will continue to get 6% until August 2009. So in real terms the value of my bank account will not dwindle, and give me a little windfall of about £20. We're not talking about substantial amounts of money here. I must add that this outcome was a matter of pure luck, rather than strategic economic investment!

However, low interest rates make the pound less attractive to foreign investors, so when we go abroad, we will be able to buy less with our pound.

Higher interest rates also control inflation better, but I'll refer you to an economist for the precise mechanics of how (I haven't the foggiest).

What is the best level of interest rates? That which keeps inflation reasonable and doesn't start a run on the pound.

So interest rate policy should consist of a series of targets for inflation and strength of the pound, and we should tailor the interest rates to meet these targets.

That is, in esccence, the fiscal policy of the Bank of England, as a non-economist understands it. Simple, isn't it?

E-Mail Error On Welsh Signpost

2008-10-31T18:42:00.001Z

Beware that when you send a text to be translated by your translation department, the reply may not always be what you were expecting:

When officials asked for the Welsh translation of a road sign, they thought the reply was what they needed.

Unfortunately, the e-mail response to Swansea council said in Welsh: "I am not in the office at the moment. Please send any work to be translated".

So that was what went up under the English version which barred lorries from a road near a supermarket.

"When they're proofing signs, they should really use someone who speaks Welsh," said journalist Dylan Iorwerth.

And here's the signpost:

Classic!

First Week At University

2008-10-09T06:50:00.000Z

That title is misleading, as I have only been here from Saturday to today (Thursday), and for some unfortunate souls, lectures have already started.

First thoughts - my college is aesthetically very pleasing, apart from the block I'm in, so I'm quids in on that front. College chapel had a service on Sunday for Freshers, and take it from me, you do not know how exhilarating it is to hear the Kendrick classic From Heaven You Came played on church organ. Exhilarating is the only possible word to use.

In Other News, I seem to have joined most sporting clubs available - it does not help that there are two different types of each club, a college one and a university wide one, so most of my sports I foolishly doubled up on. We'll see how much use I make of them later.

The Credit Crunch - Ultimate Test Of Capitalism?

2008-10-02T21:00:00.000Z

Over the last six months, we have seen turbulent economic circumstances: share prices are in decline, the housing market is in freefall, and there is a distinct loss of confidence in the banking sector. The answer that various governments has to offer is bailing out the big firms that got us into this trouble in the first place.

But is this wise? By doing this, the goverments are effectively admitting defeat in the fight for capitalism. Big banks can remove their bad debt by swapping it for good government bonds, thus bypassing the cycle of investment leading to return, or lack of one. The fundamental principle of a capitalist society - one can invest for profit, but a profit is by no means guaranteed - is being bypassed, because apparently the banks are too important to the success of the capitalist system for capitalism to be allowed to take its course.

Do not misunderstand me, I am not against government intervention per se. What I am against is the bypassing of the economic system in which we operate for short term gains. Government intervention should be strictly within the system, rather than trying to bypass the capitalist system. By this I mean that governments should be treated as any other investor, willing to take equity for the cash that the system wants. That way, the system works as it was intended to. Although this should only be used as a last resort, it is up to individual governments to invest as they see fit. This way, the bailouts happen on the Government's terms, rather than on the big companies' terms. This is a system that holds those responsible to account for their actions, rather than pretending it never happened.

Hopefully this episode will herald an age of fiscal responsibility by everyone. But let us cast our minds back to the last time of speculation, ridiculously cheap credit and soaring stock markets. This is not by any means a 21st Century phenomenon, a very similar thing happened with the Wall Street Crash of 1929. This crash was highly exacerbated by Hoover's refusal to act, which shows that government intervention in the markets to create stability is, in my view, highly undesirable unless on the conditions outlined above, but unavoidable. With state aid, e.g. the Tenessee Valley Authority et al, the American economy came through in the end.

So we must stay alert to the fact that capitalist markets are to a large extent self-corrective. Due to the laws of supply and demand, as credit becomes scarce, the reward for providing credit, e.g. a better interest rate on your bank account, will increase, thus making it more profitable to provide credit, so more people do so. Defaults on mainly US mortgages sucked the credit out of the system, but this is an alternative approach to radical government expenditure to solve the problem.

To conclude, capitalism has been tested. But it has been tested before, and it pulled through. All that has happened is that the economic growth built on debt has collapsed, which should serve as a warning not to do it again. But rather than bailing out those concerned, capitalist systems have the capability to recover from these setbacks, which is altogether a much less risky strategy than nationalisation of banks. I accept that government intervention is unavoidable to save the system from ruin, but the capitalist system that we praise when it "works", but criticise when it doesn't, should have the chance to redeem itself first, before any risky intervention. And when the state intervenes, it should do so within the system, rather than by influencing the system from outside, and should be treated as any other investor. These are the conditions for a successful revival. We must realise that we got it wrong over the last decade, and rather than patching up a discredited economic theory, we must allow the markets, that have served well in the past, to create the foundations of a more responsible future.

Which Discworld Character Am I?

2008-09-29T12:36:00.000Z

It may surprise you to know that, in the current financial turmoil and the impending third anniversary of this blog, that this is the best post I can come up with. But rest assured, a post on the free market, capitalism and bail-outs is approaching, just as soon as I've thought of something interesting to say.

Anyway, back to the quiz:

Your result for The Which Discworld Character Am I Test...

Susan Sto Helit

You scored 90 intelligence, 74 morality, and 59 physical strengenth!

As Death's granddaughter (a long story, which you greatly dislike), you inherited his ultimate practicality and lack of fear. In fact, boogeymen and other childhood boggles fear YOU. Often assisted by the Death of Rats and his raven, you manage to fix the Universe inbetween working as a governness and educating the masses. The ultimate teacher.

Take The Which Discworld Character Am I Test at HelloQuizzy

So there.

Tour of Britain - Photos

2008-09-10T15:57:00.001Z

It is clear that I have neglected this blog lately. When I was trying to gain readers, I tried to write one post per day, about some article on the BBC news site, before I went to school.

But something about the political situation is wrong. I'm missing a sense of confrontation, of a fundamental clash of ideas, or some big issue, to get me worked up enough to bother writing a post. And I got very worked up, if you consult some of my starting posts.

Just to give an idea, today's main political story was Harriet Harman reigniting the class war at the TUC conference. I am far too young to remember the last time the Labour Party used class warfare, and as such, I have no comment to make or opinion to express on this issue. We're clearly getting the wrong kind of politics now. Either that or I'm becoming much more amenable in my old age.

But enough about that. In my absence from the frontline political scene(!) I have been seriously indulging the other love of my life (you can tell I'm sad/romantically unattached at the moment!): cycling. Yes, I don the lycra shorts, but more often trousers in the chilly Oxfordshire wind, and bomb around the otherwise peaceful countryside with my GPS plotting speed, calorie and timing information, as well as directing me on my route. I can even upload some of my routes for other people living nearby with Garmin devices. This is seriously WEIRD for an 18 year old, you may think, although hopefully the Olympic triumph that was British Cycling may help.

Anyway, back to the point for the umpteenth time. I love blog posts. You start writing, and then you get seriously sidetracked. In the olden days, I planned my posts meticulously. Not any more, as you may tell. ANYHOW, I went to the stage finish of the Tour of Britain in Newbury on Monday, and saw a pretty quick bunch sprint. Twas very exciting, although we had a non-cyclist in our midst who had to have the situation explained. Top Tip: If you go to any bike race, especially ones on the track, take somebody who knows what is happening, as it is not very obvious. Especially telling your Points from your Scratch, and working out the leader of the Madison is deceptively difficult. The non-initiated find the Individual Sprint confusing, or even downright silly.

I have pictures, you will be pleased to hear. Firstly, all pictures copyright me (David Webster). If you are sad enough to want to display these in any medium, a link to this page must be provided, or an acknowledgement that they are mine must be displayed.And be warned. My Law course at Cambridge has the option to study copyright law! Firstly, Julian Dean, Kiwi National Champion and Chris Sutton contest the sprint. Ironically, the stage winner was Matthew Goss. You can see his front wheel (I think) in the picture:

Bradley Wiggins' backside, anyone? One of the irritating things about pictures of a bike race is that because they move so quickly, you are forever taking pictures of people's bums.

And Alessandro Petacchi on the podium. This picture I got using my extraordinary height advantage over the slightly short/portly/under 12 nature of the rest of the crowd:

And to show how close we got to the stage winner, here is Matthew Goss's back (see what I mean about rears of people):

And my personal favourite, an artistic(ish) picture of the solo breakaway rider (almost 50 miles on his own at 30mph):

Altogether a very exciting ten seconds racing, and half an hour's photo grabbing afterwards. Heartily recommended if the Tour comes past your town (wherever my faithful readers may live) next year. I have about 40 pictures of this event, and can bore anyone rigid with them if you want me to!

A-Level Results Day 2008

2008-08-15T07:38:00.000Z

Yesterday was results day across England. And my opinion of the debate over exam simplicity is that of course the science exams are easier now, as they have taken more and more stuff out of the Maths and Chemistry A-Levels over the last few years. Look at what now gets taught in Further Maths - my dad learnt some of it for O-Level! It is a fact that among science subjects exams are now easier, but among arts subjects, slightly less has changed, in my experience.

Anyway, I ended up with 5 A grades, including my History grade that was bang on the borderline for an A grade - 480/600. So off to Cambridge (Queens' College!) in October, when all the paperwork gets sorted.

All in all, a rather successful day yesterday!

Batman, The Dark Knight And The BBFC

2008-08-08T12:37:00.000Z

This rant may not appear very Conservative, but it cannot be denied that it is a comment. Last Friday, I went to see the new Batman film with friends. It was a very good film, but the controversy has been raging over the certificate that it was given, a 12A. For the benefit of all, this rating means that anyone can see this film in the cinema, so long as if they are under 12, they are accompanied by an adult.

I have seen reviews bemoaning the quantity of violence in the film, drawing comments about desensitising the young and impressionable to violence, to the end that in the eyes of the reviewer, Batman should have been given a 15 because of the harmful effect it could have on the young.

Yet precious little violence was shown on camera, it was all implied off-camera by the behaviour of the actors. So young people are not viewing much violence in the film; most of the violent acts are skilfully implied in the mind of the audience.

Anyway, we don't need fictional worlds to see violence. Scarcely a week goes past without news of a fatal stabbing/shooting, so in many ways, the real world that we live in contains violence, which is all the more scary because it is real.

People attribute the rise in violence to these films, but as any statistician should know, an observed pattern does not necessarily imply causation. It is my opinion that young people are involved in violence because they feel intrinsically insecure in themselves, and so carry knives to appear more confident. But with more knives on the street, it stands to reason that there will be more knife incidents, as I am convinced that there is a causal link between more knives and knife crime. My diagnosis does not, please note, more knives on the streets because Heath Ledger, in a spirited performance, expresses a preference for knives over other means of killing, for instance. Films have little to do with the situation.

Having said that, it remains clear that some films are intrinsically unsuitable for children of a certain age. For instance, even though Batman was a 12A, I would refuse to take anyone younger than 12 to see it, as I believe that it is unsuitable for that age group. In which case, in my eyes, it might as well be a 12. To mitigate this problem, I propose removing the 12A classification, and instead, if a film warrants a 12A classification, the censors should upgrade the rating to a 12. For the reasons to do with violence outlined above, a 15 would be overreacting, in my opinion.

As I feel that the English young person's inherent insecurity is to be blamed for increased violence, we have two options. To use stop and search powers to confiscate knives and guns much more than they are currently being used, or to give young people a sense of purpose. That is, to get them into employment, or a full-time college course, and keep them busy at something that would benefit them (financially or through qualifications). I would therefore recommend increasing the policing powers and/or budget, to reduce the problem itself, and then to significantly increase the number of Apprenticeship schemes through financial inducements for businesses, to tackle the root causes of the problem. As Stolypin, Prime Minister of Russia 1906-11 said:

Repression, and then, only then, reform."

To do one without the other would only be half a job.
To conclude, it is wildly inaccurate to blame films and the censors for violence in the world today. The censors are merely interpreting guidelines, and in any case, the proliferation of ridiculously violent games such as "Grand Theft Auto" and "Manhunt" are much more legitimate targets for this claim than a film with little on-screen violence that only uses up 2.5 hours of a person's life. The root cause of the problem, as always, is insecurity, the need to appear strong and aggressive to bluster one's way through life. So a two-pronged strategy: remove the instruments of violence from the streets, and tackle this insecurity problem by getting people involved in worthwhile jobs to the benefit of all.

Cyclist On The Rampage

2008-07-19T07:51:00.000Z

If anyone wants to see a star of British sport prove that he is the world's best sprinter, you would need to look at ITV4 this past week. We have seen a complete demolition of the world's best sprinters by Mark Cavendish, a young(ish) Manx sprinter strutting his stuff at the Tour de France. It has been a joy to watch. He has won four stages this year so far, unprecedented for a Briton, and he will completely rewrite the record books for TdF performances over the next ten years. Anyone outside cycling fails to see the significance of this. For most cyclists, winning a stage of the TdF is the pinnacle of their careers. Every rider is at their peak for this race, it is the only race which matters (in practice) in cycling. Winning the others is alright, but to claim to be any good, you must excel at the Tour. Which Cavendish has done in spades.

I have already mentioned how winning half the gold medals in your field (track cycling) lost out in Team of the Year of Sports Personality to a team that came second in a rugby competition. So even though the track team bettered their performance this year, and Cavendish has won 6 Grand Tour stages in one year, I hold out precious little hope for a cyclist to get anywhere near the top 3 sports personalities this year. Even though it is one of the only sports that we are any good at.

So I challenge those who live in Britain, especially as we have the Alps coming up in a few days time, to sit down at 7pm, tune into ITV4 (channel 28 on Freeview) and enjoy the ride. For those who don't have the patience for a whole hour of cycling, the last 15 minutes, from 7:45-8:00 has the most exciting part, the finish. It could be hill-top (good for breakaways) or flat (good for sprinters). Enjoy, as I have done these last two weeks.

Not The B-Word Again?

2008-07-05T15:55:00.000Z

I would like to mention two BBC headlines, both on the same day, about the withdrawl of a Labour candidate and the resignation of the Tory Deputy Mayor of London. They are:

Tories in 'disarray' over Lewis
Labour Man Quits By-Election Race

Spot the difference anyone? The first story is the BBC reporting on what Hazel Blears said about the Tory deputy mayor, and the other is reporting about the withdrawl of a man from the Labour candidacy. Any fair corporation would have phrased the first story as "Deputy Mayor Quits Over Allegations," rather than letting Labour assume that the Tories are guilty of letting an improper person be mayor and then reporting Labour's statements as fact. Who knows, he could be innocent!
Similarly, the second story, in keeping with the first, should be phrased "Labour in "complete meltdown" in Scotland." Of course, I would not want the BBC to go down the partisan political route of this type of headline. The facts should be reported, and nothing more. Which makes using Labour's opinion of the Conservatives in London as a basis for a major news story while refusing to publish a similarly provocative headline about Labour's troubles in Glasgow incredibly biased.

There we go, used the word. Out of my system now.

Blogger In Draft

2008-07-03T08:46:00.000Z

Lesson 1 of computer technology: never be the first to try something out.

My blog has now incorporated Blogger in Draft, which means that some of the more irritating things about Blogger have finally been ironed out.

Firstly, you will notice a comment field at the bottom of the post page, rather than a completely different page loading up every time you want to comment. Much more sensible. But it does not work simply by pressing the button, some code needs to be changed. This is where doing it later helps, as someone else has already solved this problem.

Secondly, there is on the post page a star rating system. This looked cool, so I put it in. But it doesn't work straight off, so one needs assistance to get it started. I could not be bothered with any of the other updates, as they seemed a bit silly. Anyway, some more thinking will be required to get the stars on an archive page or the home page.

I hope that this makes viewing the blog a more enjoyable experience.

David

Donations Police File

2008-07-02T18:29:00.002Z

I find all this about the Peter Hain donations scandal most confusing:

Police have handed over evidence relating to donations to Peter Hain's deputy Labour leadership bid last year to the Crown Prosecution Service.

It follows an inquiry into the late declaration of more than £100,000 given to his failed campaign.

The Metropolitan Police said the CPS would say whether more inquiries were needed or charges should be brought.

Mr Hain has admitted that although he declared £77,000 on time, a further £5,000 was not declared until November - and in January admitted that a further £103,000 should have been reported.

So he has admitted that he has broken the law. Then, why is it only a possibility that he could be prosecuted? It cannot be for a lack of evidence, as he admitted that 17 donations were late, breaking the law.

Could it be that when Labour introduced these laws in 2000, they thought that it could not apply to them, so when scandals like this break out, the old "they're all at it, but not anymore, so no need for prosecutions," excuse gets used. Even though Hain has admitted breaking the law?

The fundamental issue here is how accountable is a politician? Hain is trying to push the blame onto his staff by claiming that "his campaign" was at fault, and he rectified the problem when he found out. But I cannot believe that he was in the dark over the origin of £100,000 that he was spending. It is a large hole in anyone's budget. But anyway, a politician should be responsible for his backroom staff, just like a government minister is responsible for his department. And if a preventable situation arises in government, that minister takes responsibility for his administrators. Peter Hain is adeptly passing the buck.

The fact remains that an illegal act was committed. The law cares not about people's remorse in establishing guilt, which is obvious in this case. The question is who should be prosecuted. If the precise person or persons remain unknown, then Hain, as responsible for his department, should represent his staff in the dock. Sentencing is where Hain's attitude will come into play. And if the CPS don't press charges, I will.

Hard Rock Calling

2008-06-30T07:42:00.003Z

On Saturday afternoon/evening, I went to the above event with a friend, as Eric Clapton was playing. Also on the bill were Robert Randolph and John Mayer, so all in all it was a very enjoyable six hours of music that not even the presence of Jason Mraz and Sheryl Crow could dampen. As they would not allow any decent cameras into the enclosure, I only have a rubbish mobile phone picture:

Which if I remember was taken during John Mayer's set. All in all, a cracking day out, and much more enjoyable than listening to an old rapper attempt to sing "Wonderwall" at Glastonbury. If Hard Rock Calling continue to put out such a great lineup, I could even make a return visit.

Royal Finances

2008-06-27T11:38:00.002Z

Today it is claimed that:

The Queen and the Royal Family have cost each taxpayer 66p during the last 12 months - up 4p on the previous year, Buckingham Palace accounts have shown.

The total amount spent on maintaining the monarchy in the year to 31 March rose by £2m to £40m, figures revealed.

That is not a lot of money. Just to put this into perspective, the royal family drive a lot of tourism to sites like Buckinghan Palace, and the royal memorabilia trade is quite lucrative. So overall, the impact of the royal family is quite small on the public purse.

Compare this with the EU. Our membership payment is about £40bn this year, the equivalent of if every man, woman and child in the country paid £650. That's the price of a week's holiday rental in Spain (if you go to the right place). For everyone in Britain. And we lose £5-10bn a year from being a member anyway. So overall, the EU is not a good financial investment.

Anyway, those diehard republicans who will be outraged at the royal family spending £40m could perhaps prioritise and start campaigning against that greater waste that squanders £5bn of taxpayers money every year. Those who (like me) want economy in public expenditure need look no further.

Gender and Racial Discrimination To Be Allowed By The Government...

2008-06-26T11:27:00.002Z

...Provided you are of the correct gender (female) or race (ethnic minority). Or preferably both. Think about the doors open to you if you tick both boxes. Alright, she has not said this explicitly, but the legislation is obviously targeted at getting females into male-dominated environments, as there are more of these than vice versa. Read this:

Equality minister Harriet Harman has defended plans to allow firms to discriminate in favour of female and ethnic minorities job candidates.

She said firms should be able to choose a woman over a man of equal ability if they wanted to - or vice versa.

The new Equalities Bill will also force employers to disclose salary structures in a bid to close the gender pay gap.

The plans, which will be adopted first across England then Wales and Scotland, will also ban all age discrimination.

So while promoting race and gender discrimination, this bill will outlaw age discrimination. Isn't this a case of "one step forward, two steps back?"

Everyone should be treated as equal, and the argument that positive discrimination, to balance all previous discrimination, makes no sense. To pick an example, how many men want to be primary school teachers? I was never taught by a man in primary education (the headmaster was the only male teacher) and the current state of my primary school is female-based. That is not to say that it was a bad thing, but offering positive discrimination to men would not work, as there are so few available. So there is a problem with supply in these plans.

To use race and gender as a means of deciding between two otherwise identical candidates is a fallacy. There is no such thing as two identical people, with identical qualifications and identical personalities that come out at interview. There is always a means of distinguishing between people based on these factors without resorting to an arbitary "tick-box" attitude to recruitment.

This leads me to conclude that the best person should get a job, regardless of age, sex or race. This is the only way to ensure complete fairness, otherwise there will be a new generation, the "discriminatons," of white male young people (like myself) unable to get a job due to the discriminatory hurdles that the government has placed before them. Fairness, rather than some bonkers notion of "fair representation" should be pursued, at all costs.

Pooh Test

2008-06-25T09:48:00.002Z

These things, while completely arbitrary, are often quite entertaining, especially when written well. So, without any further ado, I can reveal that the Winnie the Pooh character I am most like is:

Owl

"Correct me if I am wrong," he said, "but am I right in
supposing that it is a very Blusterous day outside?"

"Very," said Piglet, who was quietly thawing his ears,
and wishing that he was safely back in his own house.

"I thought so," said O-wl. "It was on just such a
blusterous day as this that my Uncle Robert, a portrait of whom
you see upon the wall on your right, Piglet, while returning in
the late forenoon from a-- What's that?"

You scored as Owl!

ABOUT OWL: Owl is considered highly educated because he can spell his own name (WOL) and he can even spell Tuesday... although he doesn't always get it right. Owl is a good sort, really, although he can be a bit of a stuffed shirt, and he tends to overlook the smaller details in life - like the fact that his bellpull is actually someone's tail.

WHAT THIS SAYS ABOUT YOU: You are confident and you feel capable of dealing with whatever life throws at you. You know that you can handle just about everything... mostly because you know how to delegate the job of actually handling things to the people around you. You aren't one of those Bisy Backsons, who rush around trying to do everything at once. You prefer to stay at home and reflect on life, rather than go out and live it.

Sometimes, you know, you need to stop waiting for things to come to you and go out and get them. You need to go enjoy the weather, smell the fresh air, and pay attention to the little people in your life. They may not be as great as you... but maybe they could use your help.

Take The Deep and Meaningful Winnie-The-Pooh Character Test at HelloQuizzy

And most of the above does actually ring true!

Brown's Contempt For Court

2008-06-20T15:46:00.002Z

That title is contempt for court, not contempt of court, something completely different, although he is guilty of that as well.

Among Labour's many defects, we should now add trying to bypass the courts of the United Kingdom to pursue their agenda at all costs:

After the EU (Amendment) Act gained Royal Assent [on Thursday], they [government lawyers] wrote to the High Court saying: "The government is now proceeding to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon."

In a direction published on Friday, Lord Justice Richards said: "The court is very surprised that the government apparently proposes to ratify, while the claimant's challenge to the decision not to hold a referendum on ratification is before the court.

"The court expects judgement to be handed down next week. The defendants are invited to stay their hand voluntarily until judgement."

So Brown wanted to ratify the treaty to impress Brussels, but conveniently forgot that it is impossible to ratify something when the court is judging an appeal against ratification. It seems strange, but sadly the evidence suggests that it is typical of our current government.

Interestingly, Brown was very keen to claim public support for 42 day detention, but the opinion polls suggesting 70% in favour of a referendum on the Constitution (I'm going to be shot if I continue using this word!), appeared to pass Brown by. He's not even an out-and-out opportunist. He is pursuing his own personal agenda in power, without any democratic legitimacy, using public opinion as and when it is convenient. It is strange that 50+ new powers are heading the way of Brussels, and we have not even indirectly had the chance to vote on it.

Another interestingly, people with birthdays around now are getting birthday cards from our Conservative candidate for Oxford West and Abingdon. But my birthday was before the candidate was selected/got her act together, so I missed out. I'm going to sulk now. I want one.

Boris Johnson And Logic

2008-06-17T07:14:00.002Z

Yesterday, I did a maths module for A-Level entitled Decision and Discrete Maths for the OCR MEI board. This means anything from doing linear programming to advising a travelling salesman, to making decisions for people using probability trees. Wikipedia makes these topics seem more complicated than what we got taught. The final part is logic. This, perversely, is where Boris Johnson, not renowned for profound logical statements, came in. It did make me laugh when I opened the paper and read question one, which asked us to show that the statement:

"I could not fail to disagree with you less."

From Have I Got News For You in December 2003, could be written as:

I could succeed in agreeing with you more

The next question was:

Simplify this expression

It made me laugh anyway, having Boris on the logic section of a maths paper.