The unexpected arrival of a postal vote for the South East Region Euro Elections raised the difficult question of where to cast my ballot. But even more confusing is the array of parties.
I’d like to vote Labour, but I have to choose between them and the Socialist Labour Party. But then what if I’m feeling a bit democratic; should I pick the Liberal Democrts, Pro Democracy: Libertas.eu, or No2EU: Yes to Democracy? Then again I’m quite a fan of the Green movement; but then I have a choice of The Green Party or The Peace Party- Non-Violence, Justics, Environment. What if I’m feeling a bit nationalist? I have to navigate my way through the British National Party, the English Democrats, United Kingdom First and the United Kingdom Independant Party. It’s all very confusing!
Were I allowed a second preference, the child in me would like to pick the elusive and secretive Roman Party. Ave!
While Facebook informed me that yet another of my old classmates has a baby, I thought about teen pregnancy and the recession. More and more young people will be leaving school to go to no jobs, where’s the incentive not to start their family early? A number of girls I was at school with aspired to this anyway; I remember one telling the careers adviser that her plan for after school was to have babies. With falling job prospects I predict teen pregnancy is going to rise… Some people will ride out the recession by getting an education, some will do it by getting kids. Hmmm…
I’ve been hiding in a revision bubble for the last month or so, and as such have missed most of the expenses row. Emerged briefly to gasp for air and buy a newspaper to celebrate a relative lull in the exam timetable, only to find it still dominating the front pages.
I’m not clued up on the ins and outs of the scandal or the resignation, but on reading about Michael Martin one interesting detail stuck out. Women MPs, particuarly those elected in 1997, apparently tend to hold him in great regard for the help and advice he gave them on arriving at Parliament for the first time. As someone not quite from the establishment himself it was suggested he empathised with them and understood what it was like to be a relative outsider. I found this really interesting…
Now out of the real world and back to my bubble, five exams down, two to go.
When Cameron came to power in the Conservative party he promised a 30% female cabinet should he become PM. As anyone who has seen today’s Times can see, this seems rather unlikely.
As their front page points out, the vast majority of the top team are male. Women aren’t getting promoted and the candidates not yet selected from the infamous A-List are disproportionately female.
Why? Well we know the party has different ideas to Labour of women’s promotion; they don’t do all-women shortlists (which I am personally against actually but at least they’re getting the women in) and they don’t do women’s officers (something I am completely for). Women make up 51% of the population, 39.5% of their members, 16% of their front bench team and 8.7% of their MPS. Only 21% of their PPCs are female and so it’s not going to change any time soon either.
Why aren’t women getting ahead? Dave himself went to an all-boys school and hung out with the all-boy Bullingdon club rather a lot, maybe he thinks the lack of women is normal. Maybe he just doesn’t notice their absence. Maybe he’s just not that bothered… or is it unfair to blame him, is there an underlying problem deeply rooted in the party that needs to be sorted out?
So I missed the budget, but ate my lunch to the dulcet tones of Dave Cameron slamming Gordon Brown. Now I know I’m not the brightest of bunnies but I did get a bit confused when he
Slammed the government for making cuts, then
Slammed the government for spending too much
Slammed the government for taxing the “everyman” too much, through booze and fuel duty, then
Slammed the government for tax cuts to the “everyman” through VAT reduction, and
Slammed the government for taxing very rich people to relieve the burden on the “everyman”
… Can someone please explain to me his point with the above? If you average it all out it seemed to be a rather say-nothing speech.
My housemate and I have come to the conclusion that Alaistair Darling has the worst job in the world right now. Although as she commented, at least he has one.
So, everyone holds their breath… then in a few hours time the Tories can lambast him for getting us into debt, the Liberals can say they’d have done everything so much better without justifying how, and the Greens can moan about us not having enough spare cash to cut carbon emissions by 300%, and students can weep about how unfair it was that the Government decided to try to sort out the economy and the unemployed millions rather than cancel their student debt.
I can’t take the excitement, so I’m escaping to outer space to find out how galaxies get made. See you in my next revision break!
While Young Labour members from across the country gather in Gillingham I am hunched up in a Birmingham terrace trying to learn how nuclear reactors work…. But news has just come through that Sam Tarry has become the new chair of Young Labour. This is a very exciting time for the Young Labour movement and BULS would like to wish him all the best!
Congratulations also to Steph Peacock, who was returned unapposed as for a second term as the youth rep on the Labour Party’s National Executive Committee. Keep up the good work
Honestly, why? It looks like any other modern building, bland. The current one is loved by architects and the new one is just a nice modern structure that barely stands out. Improve the old one. I like it.
I was not impressed to see that David Cameron has sent out the following message to his supporters:
“The glitz of G20 is over – now we must focus on Britain.”
G20 “glitz“? If he thinks trying to solve global issues by sitting down and hashing out agreements with world leaders is a pointless load of “glitz” and we should be concentrating instead on ourselves… well it reminds me of this really.
How wonderfully amused I was to learn today of the existence of the Apostrophe Protection Society!
Tory commentators love to pull us up on our grammar on this here blog, in fact after Thatcher I’ll wager its their second favourite thing to comment on. How aghast they must have been to note that their own Tory council leaders here in Brum are ditching that beloved bastion of the educated!
I know you guys aren’t that well acquainted with the Guild but if you want to start up a uni branch of the APS you only need twenty members, I can help with the forms if you like: just get in touch.
Speaking of education, I was most interested in the new Tory ad that informs us the UK is now 24th in the world at maths, (not sure what kind or level of maths as it didn’t specify), behind both Canada and Korea. Last time I checked Korea was in fact two separate political entities, North and South Korea; where pray does the UK come in the world geography championships? I personally am wondering why I ought to be surprised that both these places have reasonable education systems, but would like to congratulate them both all the same.
The snow on my street has turned into sheet ice. Thick, solid ice. Half the neighbourhood is covered it. Half the neighbourhood is also on an incline, making walking frankly terrifying. I have taken to wearing wellies in the vain hope it will make walking easier. So far I have narrowly avoided falling flat on my arse/face, but I know some of my friends have not been so fortunate. If I’m slipping and sliding all over the place it must be hell for those slightly less physically able.
So as my housemate pointed out the other night, where on Earth is the grit? Why haven’t our roads been gritted and why is there nothing to grit our pavements with? Who exactly is in charge of all this? I guess that’s a council issue…
A few thoughts for the day, as I sit here updating my MP3 player.
Bush was a president actively hated my millions, if not billions, of people. He came to power when I was twelve and lasted for all my teenage years, leaving as I enter my twenties. As a young and enthusiastic hater I had a poster on the wall of his daft quotes and amassed three books of Bushisms given to me as presents, I read Michael Moore books dedicated to slamming him, I wore my Stop Bush badge for years and I joined mass protests against him. But what’s going to look dated far sooner than all this is my CD collection.
How rebellious I felt, buying Rock Against Bush Volume I! I didn’t like the music much at the time, but with track titles such as “Sink, Florida, Sink” how could I resist? How I delighted in politics-lite anti-Bush offerings such as Greenday’s American Idiot and A Perfect Circle’s eMotive! How proud of my country’s taste in music I was when the Black Eyed Peas hit number one with Where Is The Love as the troops marched into Baghdad, boasting the line “The war’s going on, but the reason’s under cover”; and again when Razorlight hit number one with America the week Bush effectively legalised torture!
The Bush years were perfect fodder for the angry rockers/punkers/rappers/poppers who filled my CD collection; I’m sure some music critic somewhere will do a proper analysis of it soon, much like the documentaries you see about Britpop and Blair’s rise to power. Something tells me I won’t be listening to records like them again for a while; I wonder if music will get a bit more a-political in these optimistic days of Obama?
LocalToryMPwatch returns today with a spotlight on Eastbourne MP Nigel Waterson. In this weeks local he describes the selling off of the currently council run Eastbourne Buses as “selling off the family silver” and slams their “secret plan to flog off the town hall”.
So is this a travesty in the same way it was when Thatcher sold off Britishcoal, iron and steel, gas, electricity, water, railways, trucking, airlines, telecoms, County Hall in London? Someone either has a bit of a short memory or is just a bleeding hypocrite.
It has been reported that at a private gig attended by Sarah Brown, singer Alesha Dixon dedicated her performance of this song to David Cameron. Enjoy!
So this weekend I went up to spend a night in London with an old friend at his mates birthday party. We had a great time; we went to some overpriced club, wore smart clothes, and drank overpriced drinks that we couldn’t really afford. But for all that, I felt like I was in some grotty club back home; the same music, the same dance moves, the same atmosphere. The same men.
So this guy has been talking to me a bit and asks me if I want a drink. I find him a bit creepy so I tell him he can buy me one if he likes, but he’d better know I’m not going to sleep with him. He laughs, buys me a drink and starts putting his arm around me and getting a bit too friendly. So I introduce him to my (male) friend and leg it to the toilets to get away from him. I leave the toilets a bit later hoping I can slip off to some other area of the club and avoid him, but he has apparently brought my friend a drink and is waiting for me at the bar right outside the toilet door. He says, come with me, and pulls me into the men’s. Before he can get to a cubicle a security guard has us both pinned up against the sinks and is calling into his tannoy for back up.
I plead with the security guard to let me go, telling him how I don’t know the man, he dragged me in and I don’t want to be in here with him. More guards turns up, they let me go and I go back to my friend, a bit shaken. Within two minutes the man is back behind me apologising and asking for my number, and he keeps bugging me for my number until we leave.
Why the hell was a man who tried to drag a drunk girl into a toilet cubicle against her will not thrown out of the bloody club? What on Earth did he say to the (male) security guards in those two minutes when I wasn’t there? And what the hell would have happened to me if the security guard wasn’t there?
The whole incident left me beyond angry. He’s not the first guy to try this on with me or any other girl and he won’t be the last; there is a certain breed of male who won’t take no for an answer, who thinks “no” is an invitation to feel a girl up and who just won’t go away no matter what happens, who think its OK to have that kind of guy in your club and not to throw him out. And this sort of male needs to learn.
I’ve just finished re-reading Jonathan Coe’s What A Carve Up!, a book I first fell in love with at thirteen (although much of its political overtones were presumable lost on me first time round). Wonderfully intelligent, funny and tragic, it tells the tale of a luckless author commissioned to write a biography of the Winshaw family, a set of modern day aristocrats and socialites who between them epitomise everything that is wrong with Thatcher’s Britain, in which the book is set. The writer’s stark lifestyle contrasts with their of opulence, greed and privilege, and at every turn he bears the brunt (either directly or indirectly) of their actions.
One of the themes of the book is that there is a fine line between greed and madness, and this is the line that the family members tread. Their attitude to life is very much “every man for himself”, one I feel sums up the underlying principle of Conservatives rather nicely. While it is no doubt a political book it is also enjoyed for its deeply clever and funny method of story telling; someone on the back cover described it as part social commentary, part detective story. Well worth a read.
I am now back in the deep and desolate South, which means a return to one of my childhood pass-times: Local Tory MP Watch. This month my dad got a letter from said Local Tory MP, setting out ways in which our Labour government and local Lib Dem council have failed us. Amongst the travesties were prominently featured on this letter were Labour’s plans to increase tax on fuel inefficient cars, and the failure of the Lib Dems to scrap a parking scheme designed to switch people onto public transport.
Vote blue, oppose all pro-green measures? Hmmm not so catchy is it?
Bored of hearing Cameron calling for an election, again, because the government did something he disagreed with.
We elected this government for five years, its their job to govern and perogative to call an election. Get over it little boy, stop getting excited and wait your turn.
Runnymede Trust report out today shows yet again that faith schools are populated by the more well off and the higher acheivers, and adds to calls for them to be stripped of their powers to select by faith.
The expansion of faith schools is one of my biggest dissappointments with the Labour Party.
This summer I got a fair bit of reading done. Rooting around in the second hand bookshop at the end of my road, I found a charming little book in an old mustard yellow cover, and emblazoned with the elaborate imagery of the wonderfully titled Vanguard Press. Liking its title, I brought it and gave it a go. It turned out the author was John Reed, founding member of the American Communists, and author of Ten Days that Shook the World; the book was a first edition of Daughter of the Revolution, and Other Stories.
The book is a collection of short stories, inspired by his travels around Europe and the Americas and set across these continents. Most are told as conversations, where the characters reveal their past and present situations to the author. It’s not made clear whether they are fictional or not, but given Reed’s career as a journalist it seems likely they are at least inspired by real people. The underlying theme is of course a cry for revolution; the people we meet in this book are downtrodden, unhappy with the state of affairs and serve to show why the state of things must change. The eponymous woman is an interesting case; her story is a call for a different sort of revolution; one of feminism. Two contrasting stories feature men off to fight in the First World War trenches, one of them upbeat and full of enthusiasm, one depressed and seeing it as an acceptable way to die.
If the book is trying to convert people to the revolutionary cause, it falls rather short. But as a period piece, and as an insight into how the young Reed saw the world, its really very interesting, and tells the sort of stories (if presumably exaggerated and elaborated) that we wouldn’t normally come across from that period.
So Jeremy Clarkson is in trouble at the BBC as well, for making jokes about murdering prostitutes. Second round of controversey, both involving men making inappropriate remarks about women. I’m not convinced that the outcry is a glowing display of national feminism though.
The Brand/Ross row was centered around the grandfather for hearing things he peobably didn’t want to hear, not the granddaughter whose privacy was invaded. The Clarkson row has failed to mention the stack of lads mags and pornos offered to James May as a prize for doing something daring with a lorry during the same episode, and instead focussed on the offence caused to (mostly male) truck drivers suggesting they murder prostitutes.
Lots of BULS will be watching the results come in in Joes, our Guild of Students bar, until the small hours of the morning. Every time I catch the news, I get more excited.
George Bush came to power when I was thirteen, and became instantly a big part of my political awareness, embodying to the younger me everything that was wrong with the world at the time. His policies on third world aid, contraception, gay rights, abortion, capital punishment, taxation, foreign affairs, education, healthcare, everything, the injustice of him holding office at all, left me cold; I long ago had to take down my poster of his misquotes, for I couldn’t bear to laugh at someone who had caused such misery to so many. The anger me and my friends felt on the day he visited the UK, and we marched through London, years ago now, still burns up again in me every time he appears on television or in the press. Now, at the grand old age of twenty-one I can see things a lot less simplistically than I used to, and realise that the films of Michael Moore are not gospel; but a large part of that childhood passion is still there. The thought that tonight his successor will be chosen, and there’s an excellent chance he’ll be against everything Bush stood for, is something still incredibly exciting to me, and I’m not even American.
My only worry now is the Obama cannot possibly live up to the hype. But for tonight I am hopefully going to be celebrating with my friends and tommorrow morning be falling asleep happy that the Republican Bush years will no longer be a living nightmare but about to be confined to a dusty chapter of history.
Utterly harrowing to read of a thirteen year old girl being stoned to death in Somalia for being raped by three men. I wish I could say I was astonished but years of Amnesty membership has taught me that shocking human rights abuses are far more common than we’d like to think.
A bit more info here about the situation with lap dance licencing, which I was protesting about a few weeks ago outside Toryfest.
At the time of our protest, only five Tory MPs had signed up to EDM 1375, calling for better regulation of the lapdancing industry. I can report that following an enquiry by the Conservatives and a large amount of pressure from womens groups, a further one Tory MPs have signed up! Astonishingly, none of the Cons MPs are female.
Shame. Did the free night at the Rocket Club win them over?
It’s another by-election, and time to look at the candidates. As reported by BULS previously, the number of females making it onto the ballot paper in British by-elections is still rather low. So I took a look at Glenrothes this week, and found that women make up 25% of the candidates.
Also interesting to note that the SNP and UKIP are standing. Each firmly believing in independance, they don’t seem to agree where the boundaries should be drawn…
So why does the BBC seem obsessed with the idea that 20% of them do, to the extent that it was the top story on The One Show tonight and pride of place on the BBC website? Normally I love you, but today it’s bad BBC. You’ve got it the wrong bloody way round.
The Human Embryology Bill has passed through the Commons. Hurrah!
This will bring hope to millions of people who suffer from or have loved ones suffering from terrible diseases. It will end discrimination against lesbian couples trying for children, and will save precious lives through the permission of saviour siblings. And at no physical or emotional cost to humans or animals.
Deeply dissappointed to see the abortion part of the bill dropped, although probably not nearly as much as countless Northern Irish women who will still have to face huge difficulties trying to obtain a safe and legal abortion. The government has promised a review of abortion law in the next two years, I hope for the sake of these women they stick to that.
And Nadine Dorries proves as clueless as ever, prophecising that “humanzees” will now be created as a result of the hybrid embryo section. She fails to grasp that these will be as much a humanzee as a tree with a person sitting on a tree branch with a bit of leaf in their hair is a hybrid treeman, and that these embyos will be destroyed after about a week. Bless.
The British Humanist association was reported today to be sponsoring posters on buses in London. These are to read: “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” and adorn the insides and outsides of buses across the capital.
I am an atheist, but my reflex reaction was that this was a bit harsh, and would probably result in some fundamentalist vandalism. Then again, other mainstream religions advertise their beliefs quite openly; railway stations reguarly have posters with Bible quotes; the Quakers have paid for adverts inviting me and other Guardian readers to join for the last few weeks; and television stations, such as The God Channel, are dedicated to religions. Religions are allowed to open schools. Scientologists and other religious sects hassle me every time I walk down New Street. Many (but not all) religions have a message that non-believers will be punished, or come to no good; compared to being threatened with an eternity of brimstone and sulphur, is being told to “get over” something really that bad?
Despite my atheism, I don’t think it’s right to go around telling other people they are wrong about their beliefs, provided these beliefs cause no one any harm. But since a number of religions routinely tell us atheists we are wrong and will be punished for it, should we fight fire with fire? I can see these posters kicking up a storm in a way that other religious posters would not, and they will no doubt be thought provoking for commutors; but if religious messages are to be acceptable in the public realm then the reality is that atheist ones must be too, even if people find them offensive.
Over the summer, through this blog BULS was contacted by Paul Crofts, the chair from 1971-1974. He went on to work in the NUS with Trevor Phillips, during Charles Clarkes tenure. He is now a councillor in Wellingborough and Northamptonshire, and was succeded as chair by Kath Hartley, now a Birmingham councillor.
Below is a wonderful picture of Paul in action in the Guild Council chambers, where many BULS members can still reguarly be found, debating and snoozing through Guild Councils. Paul will receive a BULS salute the next time we are in the pub. If any other former members are reading, please get in touch, we would love to hear from you!
A few years ago, Amnesty International invited members to send in their answers to the question, “what does a world without violence against women mean to you?” One reply really stuck with me, and it came not from a woman, but a man. To him, it meant the woman he walked behind in the street at night not being afraid of him.
I think of this every time I walk alone after dark. To the despair of my friends and mother, and despite my nerves, when sober enough I’ve always refused to let fear put me off walking home alone. I’ve been lucky in that I’ve always lived in relatively “safe” areas; but then whatever the statistics are, anyone can get mugged, anywhere.
There are measures I take to give myself a sense of security. Perhaps least effectively, I sometimes emasculate my silhouette if I’m planning a trip; a shapeless hoodie and trousers with pockets say “woman” far less than a skirt, tailored jacket and bag.
This can backfire. Tonight two separate women passed me just after midnight this morning with terrified glances, and I started to know what the man in the Amnesty magazine felt like. As I turned into my road, a man was behind me and I glanced over my shoulder. I saw he was wearing a suit and instantly felt at ease- and then kicked myself for being so prejudiced. I glanced round again without really thinking about it, and he crossed the road and sped off. Any other time of day, or if he had been a woman, it would have been ok; but because it was dark, and he was a man, he must have known it would have put me on edge. I almost wanted to shout after him, I’m sorry; I felt bad for making him feel distrusted because of his gender.
It’s one thing for me to worry about being out alone in the dark in England; in various other places in the world, the circumstances of me being there (on my way back from a pub, where I had been with gay people, unchaperoned, head uncovered, to a house I share with two men who are neither relations nor husbands) would be a catalog of crimes. It was this train of thought that convinced me to make the ten minute walk to the pub on my own at half ten, because I knew I was just lucky enough to have the choice.
But I know that by going out at night, alone, I am running a risk, be it small or large, and its one that a lot of women would not chose to take. Imagine a world without violence against women? Its one where the first thought a woman has when she sees a man at night no longer has to be fear. Its one where women are confident enough to enjoy their lives to the full, and not jump at shadows in the dark.
A damning Sutton Trust Report today has brought to light the extent to which state schools which defy govornment legislation by socially selecting their pupils.
It hilights the fact that while 12% of children nationally receive free school meals, only 2% of those in grammar schools do. The report also found that half of the country’s most socially selective institutions were faith schools.
If the Department for Children, Schools, Families is serious about its opposition to selection at eleven, I sincerely hope it will take heed of this report and take measures to make the abolition of grammar schools easier than it is at present. In the present league table and Ofsted driven culture there are far too many incentives for schools to aim for a middle class intake, and this pressure needs to be addressed and reduced. Methods of back door selection, such as the level of freedom given to religious and specialist schools, need to be quashed. If we’re not going to get serious about tackling inequalities and economic apartheid at the age of eleven, how are we going to be effective at tackling it later in their lives?
In a Republican Rally this week an audience member was given the microphone, and told John McCain that she couldn’t support Barack Obama as “he was an arab”.
McCain’s response was, “No ma’am, he is a decent family man who I happen to disagree with.”
It sounds an awful lot like Mr McCain is implying that the states of being Arabic and a “decent family man” are mutually exclusive?
The Sun predictably lowers the tone, with its pictures of “Top Tory Totty”. Apparently they have already covered the “Lib Dem Ladies” and “Labour Lovelies”.
For fuck’s sake, when will they take women in politics seriously?
Oh a side note, one of the security guards at Toryfest08 was overheard by one of the feminist protesters on Sunday, rating female delegates out of ten with his colleague.
This afternoon I joined a group of feminists from Birmingham and London to flyer the Tory conference in Birmingham. We were raising awareness of EDM 1375, which calls for a loophole in licensing law to be closed so that lap dance clubs are no longer classed in the same catagory as coffee shops. One of our main bugbears was that while the Conservatives have publically condemned the loophole, only five of them have actually bothered to sign up to it.
What struck me was… the costumes! Everyone was in suits- everyone! I don’t think I saw a single pair of jeans walk through the entrance hall that afternoon. As it got colder and later a fair few delegates appeared rather drunk- especially the young woman who told us loudly that she’d “rarther be a lapdancer than work in a coffee shorp!” before running away when we asked her why. One man didn’t see the need for any regulation whatsoever and seemed unconvinced that sex trafficking was any sort of problem.
But on the whole the response was ok, although there was none of the buzz of factions and pressure groups you get at anything vaguely left wing… and I wonder how many delegates made use of their Rocket Club vouchers?
A Catholic school has banned the cervical cancer vaccine from being given on its premises. It cites possible side effects as its reason.
I don’t believe that for one minute. How can they justify denying young women access to life saving vaccinations? That doesn’t sound very Christian to me.
Good old JK Rowling I’ve been a fan of hers almost as long as I have been the Labour party, having been given the Philosophers Stone for Christmas in 1997. It’s a welcome reminder to the public that the Tories still pose a threat, and that they really don’t have the interest of real, vulnerable people at heart. As a self made millionaire she could so easily be a poster girl for the bizzare Conservative “You can get it if you really want” campaign; but she has her head screwed on, and isn’t about to forget where she came from and how difficult it was to get where she was. She has hinted before that her Potter stories were an allergoy for the Thatcher years, and I’m delighted that the policy she most hates of the Tories is their clueless policy on married tax breaks.
Critics have suggested that if she were serious about child poverty she’d have given her money to another charity; but it comes back to the debate as to who should look after needy causes, the state or the charitable sector? Rowling has clearly chosen the state, and has recognised that keeping Labour in power will secure not just one million pounds to fight child poverty; it will mean a lot, lot more.
Two blogs have caught my eye this week, both featuring controversial women.
The first, no regular user of WordPress can have failed to notice; having been little mentioned in the press, the Alaska Women Reject Palin Rally is hearteningly reported on the Mudflats blog, and details the protest which saw over a thousand Alaskan women picket Sarah Palin’s post convention homecoming. How bitterly disappointing it is that the woman with the best chance of making the White House perhaps ever has such retrograde views on both human rights and scientific fact; and how intensely frustrating that the world doesn’t seem to mind.
On the other side of the Atlantic, Harriet Harman holds the equivalent job to that which Palin is vying for, but the contrast could not be greater. A champion of womens rights, with her head firmly screwed on, Harman is Palin’s political opposite. Harman is no stranger to being slagged off in the British press for her feminist policies, and the blog I came across yesterday sadly reflects how a lot of British men feel about her. It is written by an angry conspiracy theorist, but the views expressed on it are far form isolated; they are just a slightly less eloquent regurgitation of the views routinely expressed about her by the right wing press.
Palin is feted by a stunned British media; even the Guardian, opposed to her politically, saw her as a curiosity and gave her far more coverage than she deserved. The amount of over exposure is illustrated by a quick Googlefight; Sarah Palin gets nearly twice as many hits as her Democratic counterpart, Joe Biden. The contrast between the coverage she and Harman receive is exemplified in The Sun article comparing her to “that boot-faced robot of political correctness Harriet Harperson”.
Why is our homegrown womens champion routinely belittled while this Alaskan medievalist is so celebrated? I worry it is a question of glitz and glamour as much as it is one of politics. Harman is neither dour nor unattractive, but inhabits the drab world of UK politics, and is unlikely to send women rushing to the shops to buy her glasses or have them copying her hairstyle. Harman is upfront and unashamed of her feminism, while Palin hides behind her super-woman exterior a set of downright dangerous policies that could set back the fight for womens equality in America by decades. That the UK is so transfixed by this woman and so unappreciative of Harman means either the press is inheritently shallow, sexist or both. While I would like to think it is the former, I fear that sexism has rather a lot more to do with it than we would like to admit.
Whenever I am working, I fall into the habit of thinking of all prices in terms of time worked, rather than pounds sterling. On my low rate minimum wage of £4.60, life starts to break down into hours.
For example, there are the costs incurred just getting to and from work; and any other expenses, like uniform or food. In my mind I take these costs off my hours worked; I know I must work x amount of time before I start to break even. Just at a glance:
Return train fare to work: 15 mins work
Taxi fare on Sudays, when public transport not availale: 90 mins
Trousers to work in (Tesco Value): 2hrs ten mins
Boots meal deal (If I forget lunch): 35 mins
Then the other stuff of survival and leisure:
Newspaper: ten mins
Pint: 20-30 mins
Cinema ticket: 45 mins
Takeaway meal: 90 mins
DVD: 2 hours
Train ticket to see family: eight hours
Typical text book: nine hours
Weeks rent: ten hours
And just for interst:
Admissions ticket to my place of work: four hours
It’s a funny way to look at things, dividing them up into hours given for what is gained. The weirder thing is, wheras everyone gets the same amount back for the money they pay, everyone gets something completley different back for the time they put in. One of my hours is not equal to someone elses hours in the time economy, but to each of us an hour of our own lives is equally precious. This is the injustice of low paid work.
This summer has been an experience for me; one invaluable and insightful, yet at the same time one that has left me with a deep sense of injustice and a frustration. Three years deep into my degree and drowning in my overdraft, I quit the temp agencies and found a summer job. The work was low-grade and required few qualifications, but I entered it boasting three years’ experience in a near identical position, plus an additional two years working as a temp in similar roles.
Imagine then my surprise when it emerged I was earning less than my colleagues. Not just than the permanent staff; other temps with far less experience were getting paid more than me. It’s an all too familiar story, and even now, decades after it was outlawed, firms get regularly taken to court for paying their female, disabled or LGBT staff less than others doing the same job. But mine was not one of these cases; on the contrary, my employer’s right to pay me less for identical work was enshrined in UK law, and it’s all because of my age.
Living independently and renting a house, paying bills and studying for a degree, I incur all the same life costs as I will in seven months time, when I turn twenty-two. I enjoy all the same rights and responsibilities as I will next March, and I could, were I so inclined, be married or have children to support. This doesn’t just apply to people of my age; it could be anyone over the age of sixteen.
So why is my employer allowed to get away with paying me less? At present there are three different minimum wage brackets, and the temps I work with, all with the same job, span them all. My supervisor, three years my junior and with more job responsibilities than me, is paid less. A girl who has since left, with no previous work experience but one year of life more on me, earned nearly a pound an hour more than me; another, saving for University and trying to fund her way through college aged 17, over a pound an hour less. All of us working there were students at some level or another, trying to make ends meet; thus dismissing the argument that a lower wage encourages people to stay in education longer. If anything, it makes it harder.
Age discrimination is a hot topic at the moment, but most of the media focus on the top end, with the elderly being retired or sidelined early. When will we look to the young people, who work long hours in often dull unrewarding jobs, often to fun education or to support a family, yet are paid less?
Equal pay must be given for equal work. Many Labour Party members will hail the minimum wage as the party’s proudest achievement, but while I am without the £162.84 I missed out on this summer, I cannot celebrate it. The developent rate is nothing short of an age tax, levvied on some of the poorest, lowest earners in our society. Let’s do the Labour thing and scrap it.
Six BULS volunteers, plus a couple of comrades from Sheffield, will be heading to Reading festival to raise club funds. Wish us luck, join us in prayer for sunshine…
A poll in the Guardian today puts David Miliband and Gordon Brown an equal 21 points behind David Cameron in the popularity polls. Hopefully this should help put to bed speculation about a new leader: The evidence suggests there is no point in a Milibland challenge.
As I have said all along, I don’t care who leads us just as long as I can be proud of the policies we promote and enact. Since there is an excellent chance we won’t get a forth term, it would be exciting to see some of the progressive policies that came out of the national consultation put into practice while we know we can, rather than gathering dust in a forgotten manifesto. Sorting out the minimum wage would be a nice start…
Better late than never! I thought I’d share some Glastonbury pics here, now that I finally have internet in my house. BULS volunteers worked at the festival pulling pints to raise money for the club’s campaigns, courteousy of the lovely Worker’s Beer Company. Anyone fancying some festival fun next year, make sure to join the club in Fresher’s week and watch this space…
As an atheist living in a predominantly non-Christian country wich happens to have a Christian heritage, I get incensed with the country shutting down on Sundays.
Needing to get to work early yesterday morning, I was unable to take the train as normal, as it was a Sunday; I was unable to take the bus, as it was a Sunday. Not fancy walking for an hour prior to the nine hour shift on my feet when I got there, I got a taxi to work- costing me an hour and a half’s wages. Finishing at 6, the shops were shut, and I was unable to do the shopping I needed until today, as it was a Sunday.
Back when I was at sixth-form college I did 9-5 days Monday to Friday, then worked 8-5 Saturdays. On my one day off, a Sunday, I was very limited in my leisure options because everywhere was bloody closed. The idea of the nation taking it easy for one day a week is all very nice, but if that’s you’re only day off then you are barred from living it normally. If you have to work that day, you can’t get to work as you normally would, and it negates the idea of a “day of rest” anyway- emergency services and essential services don’t have a designated down day every week, why should the rest of us be subjected to it? In any well managed workfoce the staff will be given sufficient days off to rest themselves, make that law instead of forcing it to be a Sunday. Not even the religious argument holds up any more, as less than 50% of the country call themselves Christian.
When will we end this bloody annoying hangover from yesteryear and start to have a fully functioning country?
We’ve all heard of this year’s SATs marking fiasco. We’re constantly told that students are over tested. We all know that schools put overemphasis on training students for the SATs rather than giving them a rounded education. And a lot of us hate league tables.
SATs were meant to be a test of schools, but have become a test of pupils too. Headlines report how students are without results, anxiously waiting; this is completely wrong, the point of SATs was to see how well the school had taught (whether it achieves this or not being dubious), not to be a level of achievement for each child to aspire to. Yes, they are useful for setting pupils, but schools can do that easily through their own tests with far less stress.
The Haltemprice and Howden by-election ballot paper makes interesting reading. In the absence of two big mainstream parties, a huge number of independent candidates stood; I wondered how women would fare outside of the normal election environment.
Sadly, only seven of the twenty-six candidates were female. Of these, five were aligned to parties (although these tended to be small and included the Miss Great Britain Party) and two were independent. Contrast this with the nineteen men who stood; fourteen were independent and five had parties, although again given the size of these parties they are probably best counted as independent.
What got me most about the results, however, was that of the seven women standing, six occupied the top positions 2-7 after David Davis. Whether this was due to their being women or that they represented some of the more significant of the small parties is also up for debate- I suspect the latter, but still find it interesting, and somewhat heartening.
Walking around the centre of my hometown yesterday, my friend points out to me two adjacent estate agents which have closed in the last few weeks. It’s all change in the Arndale Centre, too- gone not only is the independent bakery I used to work for, but also the art shop and the card shop. The independent record shop is under threat, and the independent bookshop is on its second “closing down” sale having twice survived the chop. New branches of Starbucks and HMV gleam in other units. Is this economy related?
Browsing the Guardian in the evening, it offers me tips on how to survive having a little less money in my pocket. Having been a student the last few years I suspect there is little they can teach me, and I appear to be right. “Food might still be ok to eat past its sell-by date”, it tells me. Other stating-the-bloody-obvious statements include the idea that I should buy in bulk to save. That’s all very nice, but I can’t afford a car, and don’t fancy carrying a three kilo bag of pasta home from the shops with the rest of my shopping.
This blog is really just a rant on all things loosely credit crunch related, so I’ll finish on to another Guardian publication that narked me off. A few weeks ago, they did a series of cut-out-and-keep guides to surviving the “crunch”- one was on raising children. They gave an astronomical figure for the cost of raising a child, followed by a break-down of what this included. It pointed out you could save money by switching to a state school. Was this really the Guardian I was reading? The grand total also included contributions to the child’s tuition fees at University, which is ridiculous as offspring are meant to pay them off themselves, and a full set of driving lessons with a first car thrown in for good measure. What the hell?! Easy way to survive the crunch- make your kids get a bloody part-time job to pay for lessons and cars themselves if they really want them, like most normal kids. Stop spoiling them.
End of rant. I’m off to the cinema to see Mama Mia. Wish me luck. :s
Yes, it’s that long awaited for by-election today in Haltemprice and Howden, and the nation is on the edge of its seat to see who will become their new MP. Will David Davis hold onto the post? Or will it go to one of the other 26 candidates vying for the role? In the absence of any main stream parties, I have gone looking for another candidate to back.
I am interested by Jill Saward, a rape victim and campaigner who has done marvellous work in the past and is against David Davis on the issue of a DNA database (it would undoubtedly drive up rape convictions), and David Bishop, from the Church of the Militant Elvis Party. The socialist in me admires his stance on todays capitalist society (It made Elvis a “fat media joke”). Not so keep on his plan to put cameras in Nick Clegg’s bedroom, though, or to imprison Cherie Blair, so I think he’ll have to come off the short list.
Local news has reported to me this lunch time that 16 MPs have signed an EDM calling for a new energy drink, named (but containing no) Cocaine, to be banned. The idea is that it may glamorise cocaine use with youngsters, something I am dubious about.
More importantly though, why won’t Coke, or Coca Cola, which one actually did contain Cocaine and is named after it, be included in this ban? And what about my year three class teacher, Mrs Cocaine?
Nine intrepid BULS volunteers braved mud, rain, sun, portaloos and Jay-Z, for a second year running at Worthy Farm in Somerset to raise funds. Conditions were blissful compared to last year’s mudbath, and much jolity was had by all. Jay-Z was fricking awesome, his “Fuck Bush” rap raised a cheer amongst BULS volunteers and his glowing endorsement of Barack Obama would have brought a tear to Tom Guise’s eye. It’s a good job Gary Hughes was watching Massive Attack on the Other Stage at the time though…
Photos of the group will be provided as soon as I am reunited with my laptop and camera back in Brum! Until then you’ll have to make do with Amy Winehouse looking a bit drunk.
It’s all been a bit quiet on the blog lately, so I thought I’d fill in with some of what BULS has been up to.
Last week saw the end of term, and informal end of term drinks were enjoyed by many in Joes, our Guild’s bar. All this week members have been putting out leaflets in Selly Oak (a big thank-you to all those who helped) and also Tyburn Ward in Erdington. Campaigning opportunities abound over the summer, with by-elections coming up in Redditch and other places…
This Wednesday a team from BULS will be heading off to Glastonbury to pull pints and raise club funds. Forecast is dry for Wednesday and Thursday, wet for Friday but here’s hoping. Nothing can be as bad as the mudbath we wallowed in last year. We’ll be back on Monday morning so watch out for reports and photos… later in the summer we will also be hitting Reading.
The committee are busy planning an exciting program of events for the coming term. Otherwise, stay tuned for more blogs and anything random we might be up to over the summer!
In 2003, me and two angry friends went to London to protest at George Bush’s state visit to the UK. With 100,000 others we marched through the capital- the atmosphere was sensational, and the queue of protesters took almost two hours to leave Malet Street. Bush had been in power two years and we didn’t want him wellcomed on our soil. We hadn’t been able to get to the anti war protests, so watching the giant effigy of him being toppled, just like the one of Saddam Hussein had been months earlier, was magical.
Contrast this with last week, as Bush made his farewell stop-off at number ten. The crowd was diminished to two thousand. I wasn’t there, but the anger still was. Why so few, after he’d had another five years to accumulate crimes? I suppose before it was a protest not just against what he had done, but what he might still go on to do. This time round, he was on the way out- there is little left for him to taint, his work is almost done. A protest against what has already happened, long after the event and without hope of changing it, is a lot less passionate than one about what might be. Guantanamo is still full. Iraq is still a mess. Aid agencies still suffer from the funds he cut them; Americans still go without health care and gay and lesbian couples still face a president who doesn’t want them to have equal rights.
But his presidency has dragged on and on. The shock of the new is gone, the contrast between him and his predecessor fading into memory. And hence, gone is the passion of those people who waved placards and shouted, took days off work, school and college to take to the streets. He is old news, and it’s too late to change anything. People are looking forward now, to his successor. He is old news.
It’s easy to get a bit disheartened as a Labour Party member in these times of low poll ratings and disappointing policy. But a good dose of Compass Conference yesterday cheered me up and restored my confidence in the party’s future.
I’ve been a member of Compass for about six months but this was the first event I attended. The conference format was refreshing; opening and closing speeches were followed by q&a sessions, and in between these were seminars and a Question Time style debate. We weren’t being talked at, and there was no adversarial atmosphere or polarised debate- it was all very open and easy to take part in. The discussion was intelligent and constructive.
The two seminars I chose, from a list of about thirty, were on the topics of schooling and electoral reform. The overarching theme of the conference was equality, and the schooling session, led by Melissa Benn, contained almost exclusively advocates of a wholly comprehensive system. The electoral reform session was interesting- its a cause I believe very much in, but finding a system that suits Britain and convincing any government to go with it is going to be a challenge.
Rousing speeches were given by Polly Toynbee, Jon Cruddas and Ed Miliband, amongst others. Harriet Harman gave a disappointing delivery on all women shortlists, but otherwise there was barely a view given that day that I could disagree with. It was heartening to hear everyone bursting with ideas for future policy and direction- my only worry is that it will all fall on deaf ears further up the party hirachy. If Labour could be bold enough now to take some of the ideas from that day- there were enough Government ministers there listening- and run with them in the next Queen’s speech, I reckon our fortunes could take a turn… and what excuse is there for not doing so? We have so little left to lose and potentially not much time left to make a real difference!
Our less liberal counterparts, Birmingham University Conservative Future, announced today that they plan to leave the Guild of Students. Since they have decied to disable comments on this issue, I have decided to write a blog on it here. I hope they won’t be too offended.
Their decision to leave saddens me, although it does not surprise me. Conservatism does not lend itself naturally to unionism, but the decision to disaffiliate seems to me unfortunate as it is based on what I believe to be a severe misconception of the nature of the Guild.
The first reason given is
Last week the previous chairman Theo Lomas informed me that BUCF had been given a stark ultimatum: play a more active role in farcical Guild politics or be de-recognised.
Every student group at the Guild is required to send one representative to each meeting of Guild Council. This is a body of elected students which meets eight times a year to debate and create Guild policy and to scrutinise the work of the executive committee. The complaint to BUCF would have been made on account of their failure to send either a representative or apologies to a significant number of meetings. While there is a debate to be had over whether societies should be required to do this, if BUCF had a problem they could have very easily proposed a motion to change it. Or they could have taken the BULS route- we have simply sent apologies to the last few meetings.
The next assertion made in the post is
It is my opinion and the opinion of much of the student body that the Guild is far too cliquey and is filled with power hungry and self righteous individuals who claim mandates of a pitiful portion of the University electorate.
This debate has been had many times on both blogs, and I doubt this will be the last. My question: if BUCF is as involved in Guild politics as they previously asserted, how on earth would they have been around enough to discover this? There is a perception amoungst many of a clique, and this is a real shame. The reality is that a lot of us who attend Guild Council get along. We have similar interests, we are all there for the same reason and naturally, we are friendly people who chat to the people next to us in meetings and in Joe’s afterwards. We tend to get along. Whatever people may perceive, the existance of a closed circle is a lie. People come, people go, people get involved, that’s it. It’s a really sad misconception and it always makes me sad that people are put off by it; and that some are too stubborn to come along and see what it’s really like.
I’m not going to go over any of the same old tired arguments again. But today I went along to Guild Council training. I’ve been on it two years now, but I thought I’d pop my head in to see what they were getting up to. There were loads of first time Guild Councillors there. The ones I spoke to were all enthusiastic, all wanted to learn how to get things done, and all had things they wanted to change. Many complained about the Guild in many ways, be it lack of communication from the Guild and their Guild Councillors, a lack of information on how the Guild operates or a specific issue, like fairtrade food or better facilities for students. They learnt how to write and propose motions, how to communicate with their constituents and how to engage in debate at a Guild Council meeting. They learnt how to scrutinise the Executive committee on what they’d been up to and how to change things. It was really positive and I left early, feeling really enthusiastic about the new intake of Councillors.
It’s a shame BUCF have decided not to be part of this new wave and to jump ship. I have always believed you have to be in something to change it. BUCF will acheive very little by disaffiliating, expecially not the change they long to see- nor will they be able to redress their prejudices from the outside. They will also lose their Fresher’s Fair stall, grant money, the right to use rooms and Guild facilities, and any right to vote to change the things they so despise. So long, guys. And good luck.
BULS members worked up a tan today in Selly Oak, door knocking with Steve McCabe MP, Cllr Mike Leddy and may others from the constituency. A beautiful and productive day.
This week, having the luxury of time to read now that my exams are over, I finished One of Us by Melissa Benn. Focussing on two interlinked families and two rising stars of New Labour, it charts their fortunes from 1971 to just after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. A fantastic book and well worth a read.
Iraq was a hugely divisive issue and it’s interesting to see it being used as a significant part of so many new novels set at the time.
So having given my thoughts below on why I binge drink, we then have the issue of why those under eighteen do it.
It can be accidental- when you pour a measure yourself you don’t know how much is in it. But in a pub situation, you always know you have 25 or 50 ml of spirit in a drink with a mixer.
Drinking outside of a pub there’s not always someone to tell you when to stop- but in a pub the bar staff must by law refuse you if they think you’ve had too much.
As I said before, a lot of people binge drink because it’s fun- so to stop us doing it we need a safer alternative. Young people can be anti-social and dangerous if drinking on the street- so put them in a controlled environment. Like a pub.
For some young people its glamarous to emulate adults and drink. So make it less glamorous by making it legal. (On the flipside, for some adults it’s a show of manliness and adulthood to keep up with your mates, to have that extra pint, to “show you can handle your drink”. Let people into pubs younger, and it suddenly looks a lot less macho.)
The problem is not that young people drink, its how much they drink and the manner in which they do it. So sort that out- let them into the pub.
The government and media are obsessed with the fact that people binge drink, but what annoys me is the lack of thought into why people binge drink.
First let’s clarify: the BBC quotes the government that binge drinking is more than eight units in a session, six for a woman. Since this equates to three pints for me, I therefore binge drink on a regular basis. Last night, for example.
Last night I was in a nice pub with some course mates, celebrating the end of their exams (mine having concluded a week previously). Over the space of four hours I had three pints of nice-tasting ales and bitters. I did not feel drunk, did nothing teribly outragous and had a pleasent evening. Contrast this with another end-of-year celebration earlier in the week where I consumed half a bottle of wine over a meal, two flirtinis at home, and a large number of acid vodka-lemonades at Snobs (a sweaty, cheap and wonderful nightclub, for those not from Birimingham). I got home safely, had a good laugh and slept off my hangover the next morning.
Both these are incidences of binge-drinking. One more rowdy than the other, but neither caused any inconvenience to me or those around me. Sure it’s not great for my body, but that’s my choice: having been made well aware of the risks by numerous government adverts, I considered them and chose to ignore them, deeming this OK so long as the only person getting harmed is myself. What is wrong with me choosing to spend my evenings like this? Why did I in the fist place?
Sometimes I binge drink without meaning to, like in the pub example. But sometimes, like in the club example, I do it intentionally, because its just fun. Don’t shoot me- it’s true. Everyone gets a bit tipsy, a bit more relaxed, your mates who don’t normally dance start dancing, someone does something stupid and you all have a good laugh about it, you’re friendly with everyone, everyone’s in a good mood. It’s unwinding and relaxing after a dull day at work or a stressful stint of exams. Provided you don’t overdo it, the worst you’ll suffer in return for this fun in the short term is a hangover. It’s a fair trade and one most of us are willing to make.
So how is the government going to deter me from engaging in drinking of this form? Well if there was a less dangerous drug I could legally take that would be as sociable and fun, I’d switch to that instead, but there isn’t a legal one I’m aware of yet. Higher prices might deter me from going out to a club more often, but then I’d have to find something to do instead- and that would still probably cost money- bowling is both dull and bizzarrely expensive, the cinema isn’t exactly sociable, and just staying in with your mates isn’t always an option (particuarly for those who live with their parents). The health risks, as I said, are well publicised and I am well aware of them. So what’s going to deter me from getting a bit drunk with my mates to celebrate someting, or just to relax and have a laugh? I’m honestly not sure, actually. And as for the new wave of measures to combat binge drinking commented on by BULS earlier this weekend, I can’t see how they’re going to tackle the reasons other people binge drink either.
Those are the estatic words of my friend Dawn, and I think they sum up rather nicely the the conclusion of one of the greatest attacks on womens rights to come before parliament recently. I am so relieved and happy.
The list of who voted how will be very interesting to read tomorrow. Lynne Jones, what a legend, responded to me within half an hour of me emailling her about the bill to assure me she was thinking straight (which if I’d had time to read her website properly I’d have realised she was very much for 24 weeks, its a good site) but I was hugely dissappointed to see other names on the list that voted for a ban on hybrid embryos. Quite surprised by some of them, too.
I am so glad the amendments fell, I have been following the debate on MSN to a few feminist friends as my dodgey internet connection denied me full coverage. Now, to get on with revision….
My mum just rang me to celebrate the first part of the Embryology Bill going through. I’m putting off revision listening to Radio 4′s coverage, and am so happy to hear the Human-animal embryos and saviour siblings go through… the future is looking a lot brighter for people undergoing terrible, terrible suffering.
I stole this headline from the Family Planning Association because it says it all. Regular readers may have noticed I get rather angry about the Human Embryology Bill. I am utterly delighted to see it pass another hurdle tonight, but I am still apprehensive about tomorrows vote on the abortion limit.
MPs from all parties, including most notably David Cameron and Nadine Dorries, are peddaling downright lies that could change forever the lives of the tiny, tiny proportion of women, many of them vulnerable, in abusive relationships or very young, who seek late term abortions and force them to carry their pregnancies to full term against their will. The most recent and fully comprehensive report on the survival of foetuses before 24 weeks has shown there has been no change in the survival rates of a foetus before 24 weeks in the last ten years. NO CHANGE.
Despite this, Nadine Dorries MP, the woman behind this, insists that the report is a “desperate piece of tosh produced by the pro-choice lobby”. I’m sorry, this report, covering not one but sixteen hospitals over ten years, and based on science, something this woman has no understanding of, is made up? She justifies her claim with the argument “So where has all the money that has been pumped into neo-natal services gone then?” Sweet Jesus. Note she doesn’t allow comments on her website- could she possibly be afraid of being corrected?
I am finding it hard to convey just how angry and sick this woman makes me feel. And David Cameron supports her. When you’re standing at the ballot box at the next election, stop and think how many women they have tried to control. How many children they want to be born into abusive relationships. How many young women they want to have babies forced through their barely developed bodies. How many desperate, terrified women they want to be forced to carry foetuses to full term because of Cameron and Dorries’ selfish, selfish attitudes.
Yes, we have too many abortions. Restricting access is not the answer. Leave these women alone. Respect their choice, one of the hardest they will ever have to make. Respect their rights to live how they want to live. Respect their intelligence by not suggesting they “should have used contraception”, or “shouldn’t have had sex”, or worst of all “should have known sooner”. Women need 24 weeks for a reason. Don’t let these sad deluded people, or the lack of eloquence in this rambling, angry blog, tell you otherwise.
Lobby your MP. Don’t let these people take away women’s rights.
I visited the new Wembley Stadium a year ago, but since the rest of my family are there today (COME ON CAMBRIDGE!) I thought I’d take a break from revision to comment on something that really baffled me about it…
Although I was there for an (awesome) Muse gig rather than a sporting match, the arena was built and is meant for sports. So why is the only food on sale there insanely unhealthy? Sports men and women have to eat healthily, healthy lifestyles are meant to be being promoted by the government and schools and just about everyone, so why is it the only food on sale while you sit and watch very fit people running around after a ball is junk food? And what’s with the lack of veggie options?
A friend alerted me to this article, displaying quite brilliantly what an utter head case the woman spearheading the campaign to bring the abortion limit down to 20 weeks really is.
This woman seems to think that an anaesthetised 21 week foetus can punch through its mother’s womb.
A paralysed baby. With an arm the width of your finger. Punching through a womb.
Sweet Jesus. What other crap about unborn babies is she trying to pedal on the public? The woman in question is Nadine Dorries, who happens to be a Conservative MP. Cameron must be so proud of her.
The National Youth Parliament held a debate in the House of Lords last month, and it was broadcast on BBC Parliament and you can catch it on iPlayer here. The debate was used to decide which three of six motions would constitute their national campaigns for the year. The first of these to be discussed is a campaign to abolish tuition fees.
The speeches and debate are very good and I found them interesting, but I am really quite concerned by some of the mis-information they seem to have come across. One speaker seems to think that she won’t be able to go to university because her parents can’t afford to take out a loan to pay her tution fees. Another quotes tuition fees as being £3000 per term (which they are not yet, at least.) Nobody stands up to correct them. This is really worrying.
Fees aren’t paid back until AFTER you graduate and are earning. Loans are given sperately of loans and living costs. Your parents are expected to top up your living loan to the maximum available; everyone gets between 75 and 100%, and your parents are expected to pay the difference between what you get and the maximum, which is income assessed and somewhere between £0 and £1500. That is all. Your parents don’t pay a penny towards your tuition, and nor do you until you graduate. I am really, really worried that these young people think they’re going to be paying up front.
Anyway, it’s not the tuition fee they should be scared of; £3000 a year is peanuts compared to the University of Birmingham’s new halls, which cost up to an utterly disgusting £5975 per annum. I believe it’s everyday living costs that are the real access issue, not tuition fees. Yes, tuition fees are massive, and yes they are scary and deter far too many people; but you only pay them back when you can afford to. It’s the cost of living that is the real, unreported problem; a student loan is simply not enough. The scare stories about not being able to afford uni are misplaced; much as I hate tuition fees, I’ll worry about them when I come to paying them; right now I’m much more concerned about keeping a roof over my head and food in my cupboard in the short term. Tuition fees do not affect student, only graduates. The cost of living, rent and the woefully inadequate student loan- this is what matters to students.
I love the enthusiasm of the Youth Parliament, and I think their campaign for youth concessions on public transport is fantastic, but it seems an education campaign is needed on what the finanicial issues of student life really are, for the benefit of all prospective students.
Interesting, although not surprising to see Brown and Cameron pick state schools for their children. Although Cameron did reportedly turn down many nearer to his home than the one chosen, and probably couldn’t have gotten away with going private whether he had wanted to or not.
As a science student, I get really incensed when governments and intelligent people ignore scientific evidence and think they know better. Which is (one of the many reasons why) David Cameron and his Daily Mail cronies are wrong, wrong, wrong for wanting to lower the abortion limit AGAINST medical opinion, and why I can’t understand why the government wants to re-re-classify cannabis AGAINST scientific opinion.
What’s the point in pouring millions of pounds into scientific research if it’s just going to get ignored? What is wrong with, once in a while, just trusting scientists? Or is it because the people in charge are all a bunch of history and politics graduates who wouldn’t know an integral from a vector?
Brij means no offence to our other regular blooger and readers, who with the exception of John Ritchie are all studying hard for politics and history-related degrees, which means they are very clever, but probably still don’t know what integrals and vectors are.
My internet connection is being a pile of shit so I can’t upload the front page. But as I collected a copy of the Guardian today, hoping to calm my revision stress by reading articles by people who agree with me, I caught sight of the neighbouring Daily Mail.
“ABORTION: FIGHT TO SAVE 2,500 BABIES EVERY YEAR” is screamed at me.
The first paragraph of the article claims that 2,500 lives would be saved every year. Regular readers will already know my views on this and should probably stop reading here to avoid repetitive boredom.
They. Are. Not. Lives. What the hell about the woman’s life?
It goes onto claim that “Women use abortion as contraception.” If this statement were true, surely it would be a strong case for improving access and education about contraception, not for curtailing access to late abortions for the minority of women, usually in desperate circumstances, who have such late abortions?
And use abortion as contraception? How many women do they think would rather go through an emotionally and physically scarring operation, which the more bigoted members of society will condem them for, multiple times than take a tiny pill once a day, or have an injection once a year, or simply use a condom? The morning after pill is a bloody nightmare to get hold of, and often requires thirty-something quid or a rather personal interview about your sex life, whilst standing in the middle of a crowded pharmacists, to get hold of. Make this easier to get hold of, you will cut abortions. Educate and make contraception more available: you will cut abortions. Leave the law where it is. If there are too many abortions, tackle the reason, don’t cut access.
It was all I could do not to spit at the stack of this bullshit sitting smugly on the newstand.
*brij and her womb sit back and wait for the predictable anti-rights backlash from the usual suspects.*
While Marley prophecises and speculates about the future of the Labour party, I thought I’d lightenthe tone with some Bank Holiday fun for our less politically animalistic readers, or those who just need a laugh, with a citizenship test from the BBC. Fifteen questions, three options for each- I got ten.
Lots of it is absolutley bonkers. Having got through “What do you do is you spill someone’s pint? a) prepare for a fight in the car park…” I half expected to find “What is the minimum wage and does it apply to seasonal fruit pickers?” on there.
Some time between midnight and two, waiting for my mate to come out the loo at the Carling Academy in Birmingham, I finally get some reception on my phone. The internet tells me Boris Johnson is London’s new mayor. My night now with something of a dampner on it, I promptly bump into Kat R of BULS, and share the news. We forlornly drift over to the bar to drown our sorrows and have a couple of shots in Ken’s honour.
I had a feeling all along this would happen, and am sad to be proved right. My Mum, a former Londoner, replied to my forlorn text with “Fuck. Think about emigration.” My Dad followed that up with “At least he’s not mayor of Brum.” Heh- I guess he wasn’t checking the Birmingham election results too closely from little old Eastbourne.
The results are what we always kinda knew would happen, but they’re still a bit of a kick in the gut. A mate from Sheffield rang me yesterday, and couldn’t sound more depressed if someone had died.
Time to move on- to learn, to recharge our batteries and to refresh…
Last night’s Question Time Mayoral special had me and The Housemates in stitches. Brian Paddick was a flickering lightbulb- at times he provided some of the best, most cutting lines (usually delightfully aimed at Boris), at others he was more like Team America’s “Matt Damon”, failing to manage a smile the whole hour-long show. Dimbleby brought up everything you hoped he would, Boris was on absolutley top form evading every question thrown at him with his stilted, rambling delivery, and Ken almost made me fall in love.
Favourite Ken moment, re olympics: “no, I don’t care about three weeks of sport- but look at all the money I got us for rebuilding the East End!”
Or perhaps, Paddick’s “This is a shameless attempt to get Lib Dems to vote for you.”
Ken- “Yes, of course it is!”
On the topic of which, I wonder if Boris will live to regret telling BNP supporters he doesn’t want their second preferences?
Paddick’s stance on tactical voting was hilarious, given his party’s long running campaign for electoral reform, and the fact that in my former constituency of Eastbourne it is only through tactical voting they won the council- check out ANY Lib Dem leaflet for the obligitory “vote for us, because the party you actually want can’t win here!” graph.
Look out towards the end for the question, “If Blair was champagne and caviar, while Brown is porridge, what is your leadership style?”… Ken is fruit and veg of course, ‘cos it’s good for you and good for the environment
Boris? After much stumbling and evasion, he decided he was like “the difference between a brand of cornflakes that is very cheap, and one that is just the same but grossly overpriced.” Er, that would be like nothing, then?
Delighted to see Brown announce plans to compensate low earners and the childless today.
Disgusted to see Cameron harping on as if his party’s policies would have done anything better for low earners. In PMQs today he is full of criticism for the PM changing his mind, and no retort to any of the points about his party’s stance on tax credits or rates. All he talks about is personal digs about Brown being weak; all Brown talks about is policy. I know which impresses me more.
Opportunities abound in Selly Oak, Bartley Green and Quinton. Drop me a shout to labour@guild.bham.ac.uk if you’d like a leafleting round, locally or further afield
It’s all a bit gloomy, especially here in Birmingham where I haven’t seen a patch of blue sky in what feels like forever. So I searched for a bit of good news to share and finally settled for:
It’s not an easy time to be in the Labour Party right now.
I spent yesterday afternoon sticking leaflets through Selly Oak’s letter boxes. I was on my own, but it was nice to have a break from revision and I love helping in my local area.
I spent the early afternoon at a women’s event in Birmingham, aimed at inspiring women, particuarly from BME backgrounds, to get involved in politics. Well done to those who put it together; it was full of women who have achieved and women who want to achieve, with a sprinkling of men who would like to help women achieve, and will hopefully be the first step on a road to a better future for the women chronically under represented in the host ward.
I spent the late afternoon in Bartley Green, sticking leaflets through letter boxes. Despite it not being the nicest of days there were six of us on the streets, and we got through a good lot of walks; the candidate there, BULS’s own Tom Guise, has been working tirelessly there all week, and my friends brought tales of their campaigning exploits at home and in Quinton too.
So then we go to the pub afterwards, and the conversation turns to the ten pence tax row. A friend says she was canvassing that morning, and it was all people could talk about. Usual die-hard Labour supporters, telling her they had been let down; Labour-certain and Labour-maybes, now Labour-nos. The blogs are full of similar stories. The papers tell of mass discontent. Alaistair Darling was (char) grilled by Andrew Marr this morning, and couldn’t explain how low earning single people were getting a fair deal. I can’t understand why my Labour party is doing this- I am baffled, and so, so disappointed.
This goes deeper than past disagreements; the Iraq war and top up fees had their detractors, but this goes right into the core of the Labour ideology (James Purnell could not be more wrong, he might be so but true members are not “ideologically neutral”). As another friend commented, older voters vote for us because they were brought up on our values and know what they’re meant to be; young voters just don’t see us as having those core principals. And no wonder, if this is all we have to show them.
The rally I went to today, the campaigning I’ve done this week, the enthusiasm of the real members, the people on the ground, is being blown away by what’s going on at the centre of the party; policies that are impossible to have any real input into, that betray our principles, are being churned out at an accelerating pace. The central coure is out of step with almost every member I have come across. A year ago I was excited at the prospect of Brown taking over, but now more often than not when I see him on the news the question rings in my mind- what the hell is he doing?
The press keep talking about the party being in trouble. Here on the ground, where the real campaigners and real members are, we’re doing alright. We still work hard, we still believe in the same core values. It’s the centre where things are kicking off. In my mind there are two parties, the small elite centre who come up with the policy and get all the attention and the outer rim, the real people. The two right now feel almost entirely disconnected. We are like a ring around their Saturn. It’s like we’re two different Labour parties, existing simultaneously but almost entirely separately.
My only consolation in this is that as I live on less than five grand a year, I won’t be financially affected by the new tax band. What I wish voters would do is put that central Saturn out of their minds on May 1st. Right now, they don’t speak for us; they have so little to do with local government. Vote for the real members, the real candidates, the real people who have put in so much hard work all across the country just to try to make every day living in our home communities that bit better. Vote for the campaigners who go out in the sleet and the snow and the rain (yes BULS have been out in all three this year), vote for the members who sit in their branch meetings and scrutinise planning applications and take action on graffiti and litter, vote for the people on the ground who can make a real difference to your local area. Don’t let shit central government policies let us down- the two Labour parties have a lot to do to reconnect, to sort themselves out. The thick smog of discontent across the divide suggests it won’t be like this for long… until then, don’t punish one for the other’s mistakes.
Having attracted the interest of some English nationalists earlier this week, I thought I’d blog about some of the other forms of nationalism around in the UK at the moment.
Right now we don’t have any parties calling for a united Europe that I’m aware of, unless groupings within the EU, such as European Socialists count. On an, erm, national level, we have the British National Party, hoping for a united Britain exclusively for the British indiginous population, however they might be defined. We have UKIP, oft dubbed the middle class BNP, calling also for Britain to get out of Europe and restrict its borders.
Then we step down a level. The United Kingdom consists of four constituent… countries? regions? sub-nations?… each boasting it’s own nationalist party. These tend to be less racist or concerned with immigration, calling instead for independent governance. Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party hold seats in their respective assemblies and parliaments. Ireland provides an interesting variation, as various nationalist groups exist in the Northern Ireland Assembly representing both pro UK and pro united Ireland views. The English Democrats campaign for a parliament of England’s own.
But here we can step down yet another level. What about the groups calling for Cornish independance? What about Government plans to create regional assemblies? At what level do we stop and realise that if we keep dividing we’re going to have nothing left?
Some of us feel allegience to the town we were born in, some to the county, such as Cornwall. Others to the region of the UK, labelling themselves a southerner or a northerner, and others to England or Britain as a whole. Yet more living in the UK might feel more European than British, and then there are people who feel more part of the Commonwelth, and those who consider themselves world citizens. If you are “nationalist” in any sense, be it for a country, region or any particular place, you have to ask yourself, at what point do we stop dividing?
I would love to see the BNP, UKIP, English Dems, Plaid Cymru, SNP, Cornish nationalists and any other group thrown into a room to thrash this out- maybe some sort of bizzarre Question Time. Could get messy, though.
0.5 % of the UK population will die in a car accident.
Figures out today show that 0.7 % of Glaswegians were crime victims last year.
It’s 0.6 % in New York.
While the BBC finds that distressing, I found that rather reassuring. Given that most of us don’t think twice about climbing into a car, the fact that the chances of becoming a crime victim are roughly the same as dying in a car should surely set a lot of people at ease… or maybe it should have them diving for the trains and busses, depending which way you look at it.
I’ve just got back from a trip to Scotland, which included an excursion to the stunning Scottish Parliament. I actually didn’t know much about it before, and hadn’t fully appreciated how much policy it has control over. A few things struck me about the smoothness of its operation compared to the mess that is the Westminster system- the policy making process is so much more measured and stremlined, and the PR system just left me deeply envious.
But what really got me was how much control they had over every day life- and how socially progressive they were. Free education! Free prescriptions for students! These mere slogans for students in England, far off dreams that countless speeches at NUS conference told us were so unattainable weren’t worth fighting for- Scotland has them! Obviously I am vastly oversimplifying here and politics isn’t quite that rosy north of the border, but I left feeling a little hard done by for having been born in the wrong part of the country. Maybe it’s because I grew up on the South Coast of England, but until this weekend I’d never actually considered England, Scotland, Wales and NI to be anothing more than regions of the UK. But seeing how much autonomy the Scots have over these issues, and how differently people and students get treated by the same government simply for being born onto a different patch of the land it governs, has left me for the first time ever feeling English (and not proudly so). Whereas before I’d seen the SNP as being a bit nuts, I can kinda now see what they’re getting at. If we’re all going to get treated differently, have different systems of decision making and have hugely different experiences in life, why should we feel British?
The systems of power in this country (the UK) are a mess. (I probably sound a bit thick for having only just realised this, but it’s just not something that I’ve never really considered- I’m far more interested in policy than process.) I can’t help but feel a bit screwed over by the present system. I’m not about to go handing in my membership card and joining the English Democrats, but we need equal and fair representation for all UK citizens: right now, we just don’t have it.
Some interesting figures were published this week by the Equality and Human Rights comission with regards to council housing and immigrants. I quote the facts as published in the Birmingham Post:
New migrants make up three per cent of the total population but account for less than two per cent of the population in council housing.
Nine in ten people living in council houses are UK born.
Council houses are given to 11 per cent of new migrants, 17 per cent of UK-born residents and 18 per cent of foreign-born UK residents.
Migrants tend to benefit from social housing after they have been settled for several years in the UK and become British citizens.
In my little perfect world, the tabloids that scream untruths about the issue would be forced to publish as many front pages with these facts as they have ones filled with unresearched xenophobia…
Now three Birmingham MPs, Sion Simon, Gisela Stewart and Lynne Jones, have declared the 20p starting rate on income tax a step too far… that’s a fair cross section of MPs, from regular rebel to usual loyalist.
While the theory goes that this will be offset by tax breaks, it is claimed the poorest will be badly hit… knowing sod all about economics, I’m not going to try to analyse it further.
As Tom Guise mentioned earlier this week, I am indeed fresh back from my first proper NUS conference. It was quite a spectacle.
It was interesting to see where the big debates fell. While the issues of governance and education attracted long, passionate debate, with the same people arguing against the same people again and again, issues of welfare and “strong and active unions” attracted no such controversey. The politics was agressive- the same tired rhetoric was trotted (heh) out again and again by both sides, and the bitching about the “right wing new labourites” who apparently run the NUS (how ironic) was constant. Factions were evident by the rainbow of t-shirts being worn for various candidates/sides of the governance debate, but not being in recipt of any of the thick field of text messages flying around the room I was ignorant to what was really going on beneath the surface.
I was thoroughly dissappointed, although not surprised by the pathetic and undemocratic efforts to filibuster controversial motions off the agenda (by various factions); I was bored of the constant bitchiness between groups and the long, laborious processes of getting things done; and I was amused by the wonderful irony of seeing a room full of Labour Students upset at the failure of the much needed governance review, having visciously shot down such reforms in their own group only a year previously. My frustration at the failure of the governance review grew as the conference went on and I was treated to more and more glowing examples of the ineffectiveness of the organisation.
Overall, I left feeling I had changed little. Yes, some excellent people were elected- Wes Streeting, Ed Marsh, Susan Nash and Hollie Williams in particular. Yes, we got a lovely set of policy outlining of the kind of things we ought to be fighting for. But with the failure of reform, nothing particuarly momentus happened. What I took away from Blackpool is the knowledge that the NUS has been left in a safe set of hands, with a clear vision of what it ought to work towards…
I was in year five at the time of the 1997 election, and our class were asked to put up hands to show who’d they’d vote for if they could. All the class, save myself and two others, picked the Conservatives. When asked why, one true blue baby (who incidentally is still a Tory) replied that Tony Blair was ugly.
The frenzy over Carla Sarkozy’s dazzling beauty and elegance and the absence of coverage of Nicolas and Gordon’s discussions and agreements is evidence to me that the tabloid press maintains the political maturity of a ten-year-old.
Tom Marley’s latest post raised the controversial issue of the all-minority-shortlist. Many of the arguments around it relate also to one of my pet hates: the all-women shortlist. Expressing a dislike of the shortlist often provokes shock and shaken heads in Labour circles, but in my experience the vast majority of women I meet are against them. In our last BULS women’s caucus, a unanimous vote was carried against a proposal by some male members to introduce positive discrimination for our committee positions. Why?
There is, after all, a strong case for all women shortlists (AWS). The argument goes that women are less likely to be selected than men because of underlying prejudice; that they are less likely to put themselves forward for seats due to natural timidity/the intimidation of entering a male dominated environment; that childcare commitments and other caring roles make them unable to devote the time needed to get selected. The all-women-shortlist has greatly increased the number of women in parliament, and this is hailed at Labour gatherings as one of our great achievements. But it is something I find myself unable to be proud of. I believe that all women shortlists are a quick fix to a big problem, and that they trick us into thinking we have sorted out inequality.
There is, as I outlined above, a vast landscape of reasons that women just don’t make it into elected positions. But I don’t believe that forcing us to pick women is the answer. The first and foremost reason is that it undermines the position of any woman selected. No matter how qualified, no matter how worthy a candidate she is, it can never be proven that she was best for the job because she did not win a fair contest. Now while it can be argued that in am inherently sexist society a fair contest is impossible, my experience of talking to voters of both sexes tells me that in the eyes of the electorate, the woman who won by AWS is not as trusted or accepted as one that won an open selection.
The greatest fallacy of the AWS, however, is that it does nothing to address the reasons for women being under represented in the first place. If childcare is the issue, we need to address both the provision of it, the timing of meetings so that they do not clash with home commitments, and most importantly the culture of women taking the childcare burden instead of men. If it is the male dominated environment that is the issue, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy; but having separate womens support networks set up, such as the Birmingham Labour Women’s Forum, or offering training in public speaking, can go a long way towards building confidence amongst women and give them a stronger support base for any problems they may encounter. If it is the prejudice of men that is the issue, it must be tackled by example; by proving our capabilities, and proving wrong those who doubt us.
The AWS tackles none of these issues. I believe it fuels resentment amongst men; and worst of all, it can give women the impression that the only seats worth applying for are AWS. The under representation of women is a huge problem, and the AWS has indeed ensured that women are better represented. At a BULS event a year ago, Sylvia Heale MP told members how parliament had become much more woman-friendly since the 1997 influx, and I applaud this- however while it has made life easier for those already in parliament and made it a more attractive position for women to hold, it hasn’t tackled the aforementioned problems.
There are two things we have to change to tackle gender inequality; mens perception and treatment of women, and women’s perception and treatment of themselves. The AWS doesn’t help either. It is a poor means to a laudable end, and something I would like to see abolished so that we can get on with sorting out the real issues at hand.
Given that the only possible function of a handgun owned by a civilian in Britain is to dispatch a bullet with the intention of killing or causing grevious bodily harm, should gun possession carry the same sentence as attempted murder/gbh?
Sheesh, if BULS can get into hot water over publishing one or two unpleasant allegations, Lord only knows what’s about to hit this bloke… or maybe not, if Obama doesn’t notice it/doesn’t care enough to write the bloke’s boss a nasty letter.
The row over the Human Embryology Bill has angered me into breaking my month long blogging hiatus.
This bill is one of the most exciting and dramatic to come before parliament in recent times. If passed, it will allow gay and lesbian couples to have children of their own; it will allow the lives of children suffering terminal conditions to be saved; it will become a shimmering beacon of hope to those suffering from terrible, debilitating, life threatening conditions. Three astonishing achievements past generations have only dreamed of.
There are a few things we, or more specifically a small number of MPs, will have to come to terms with first.
The first is the notion that children can function normally and grow up happily without heterosexual parents; that homosexual couples can love a child and provide it with the same life chances despite their orientation.
The second question is whether it is acceptable to create a human life to save another. There are conditions faced by children that can sometimes only be helped if a sibling is born, without the condition and with the right genes to provide cells that can help the original child. Is it right to select one unconscious, unthinking foetus over another, to be developed and to be born, to be loved by its parents and have every chance in life that the rest of us do- and in making this choice, to save the life of another child?
The final question is one that has been misrepresented, twisted by certain church leaders and misunderstood by so many. It is not one of creating human-animal hybrids; it is one of housing human DNA inside the empty shell of an egg provided by an animal for a period of six days, and then, once experiments have been conducted, destroying it.
Are these three things acceptable? To my mind, yes. To the minds of a number of religious leaders and MPs, no. The media reports that the MPs opposing the Human Embryology Bill are largely Catholic. I am a staunch atheist, but I spent five years in a CofE school being taught of Christianity, and I think in that time I just about got the gist of it. What I have been taught of Christianity, from the believers, vicars and such who lead our daily assemblies and the countless New Testament stories we were required to study, is that Christianity is about giving a shit about other people; about putting others before yourself, no matter what, and about making the world a better place. I cannot see how any of the three questions I have raised, if given an affirmative answer, would contravene this. All would bring an end to suffering and bring untold joy to millions of people, at absolutely no cost to anything but <insert Catholic MP’s name>’s nagging sense of doubt that they might not make it to heaven.
No monster hybrids would be created; surely the pig insulin given to diabetics and the corpses people shove into their bodies in the name of food are no worse? No child would suffer because they were selected over another embryo; on the contrary, lives and suffering will be spared. No child would grow up a moral delinquent from having same-sex parents; there are far worse happily married heterosexual parents out there.
If the Catholics have got it right and God both exists and wants us to oppose this bill, then Christianity is clearly not the bastion of neighborliness and love that I was taught about. I’m disappointed that a free vote was even needed and sincerely hope that when MPs do “vote with their conscience”, it will be in the ecstatic knowledge that they are saving bringing joy to millions at no cost to any other.
Flicking through the channels over a late lunch, I caught Ken Clarke on BBC parliament summing up (I thought quite nicely) why he thought each party had an unjustifiable position on having an EU referendum.
His points were:
The Tories had failed to explain how this needed a referendum when none of the ones they had signed did;
Labour had failed to explain how this was different from the treaty they had promised a referendum on;
The Lib Dems just didn’t have an opinion, and didn’t have a good reason for not having one (having listened to their spokeswoman minutes earlier on another channel, I couldn’t make head or tail of it either.)
Maragert Hodge thinks the Proms are “divisive”; David Cameron, meanwhile, reckons that the Proms are alright. He cites her as being “a classic example of a Labour politician not really getting some of the things that people like to do to celebrate culture and identity and a great British institution.”
I feel the urge to cite Cameron as being the classic example of someone who went to Eton. Why on Earth would I want to watch the Proms? I can’t play a musical instrument, I have never had lessons at school in classical music, and despite my mother’s best efforts to get me into it I find most of it a dull intrusion upon my eardrums, in much the same way I am sure Mr Cameron would find most of the things in my CD collection.
The Proms are no more a bastion of British culture to me than a night out in a club would be to him. I’ve got to agree with Ms Hodge on this one.
A potentially controversial statement; allow me to explain.
In student politics, more specifically elections to union or guild executives, the usual system of having one official candidate from each party does not apply. For the second year running, there are two BULS members running for our Guild presidency. Also, both the candidates for Vice President Welfare are Labour Party members. For many other positions, there are no Labour members on the ballot paper. This makes it impossible to pick candidates along party lines- something I would refrain from doing anyway in non-party political elections.
Picking candidates based on religion also is a shit reason to pick people. I am an atheist, and I was raised in a Christian based society and educated in a CofE school, but would still happily elect a Muslim, Jew, Bhuddist etc over an atheist or a Christian if I thought they would do a better job. I would never, ever expect someone to support me in a student election just because I carried a party membership card, came from a particular religious background, because of my gender, sexuality or the colour of my skin, and I think to do so shows a severe weakness of argument and character.
I know an awful lot of people will disagree with me very strongly on this, and some will think I am having a dig at particular people- I really, really am not. I just can’t help but get frustrated sometimes though at the rubbish reasons a lot of people use to choose who to vote for. It should be about who can deliver the best policies, and nothing else.
I have never had to pay council tax, and recently had to investigate it for some friends. I don’t think the way that the amount to pay is decided is fair, and I’ve read tons of letters to papers and tabloid front pages moaning about how it was going up and up. So I figured out how much a couple living in an mid rate Birmingham house would pay, expecting it to be shocked and appauled…
It came to about £10 a week each.
Ten quid? For police, fire service, street lighting, rubbish collection, roads, pest control, schools, parks, libraries, sports centers… two hours of minimum wage?
I realise that figure is subsidised etc etc, but that sounds like a bargain to me.
My dear dad mentioned to me that he used to be involved with the Worker’s Revolutionary Party. I thought I’d look them up, since it seemed more interesting than solving coupled partial differential equations.
Browsing through their website, I came across the “Statements” page, which I can only assume to contain their policy.
Flicking through the Birmingham Post today, I came across some colourful quotes from one of BULS’s more blogged-about councillors, John Lines.
Of asylum seekers, he remarked:
“Some scallywag, some scumbag can jump on the back of a lorry, come over under the tunnel and never expect to do a day’s work in his (expletive deleted) life. And if he’s been here for a time waiting for a decision we give him automatic British citizenship. The world’s gone (expletive deleted) mad.”
The local government Standards Board is investigating the statement, for councillors are expected to keep to a code of conduct, which involves having respect for other people. Apparently Lines was later to issue an apology of sorts, saying that the word “scumbag” was perhaps a bit strong. Does that mean that these asylum seekers, who have fled some of the worst horrors imaginable to get here, are still “scallywags”, then?
While I should have been working I came across gaybirminghamremembered. This project fascinatingly chronicles a the often unspoken history of Birmingham’s gay scene since the 1940s and how life has changed for the city’s lgbt community over the decades, really interesting, and at times sad stuff.
Tomorrow morning at 9am, campaigning for this years Guild Executive elections kicks off, and for those of us involved in campaign teams or running for election, tomorrow marks the official start of two insanely busy weeks. At times it’s going to be fun, stressful, cold, and emotional.
I still can’t believe some of the key sabbatical posts are unopposed- a friend at another Uni expressed astonishment when I told him, asking where were the socialists, the Respect candidates, the Tories to run against them? The answer is I guess we’re just not that radical here at Birmingham- these groups just don’t dominate our union politics like they do elsewhere. What says the most to me about the nature of Birmingham is that probably the biggest faction (if it can be called such) on our Guild council is the Paintball society. Birmingham has a reputation as being a bit conservative (small c), but to me it just seems a-political. When compared to other unions on this, I think we are very lucky. Candidates here are sometimes Labour-esque or People&Planet-y, but so much more revolves around the personal differences than off-the-shelf ideologies.
This is what makes campaigning in these elections so refreshing. While a number of BULS members are standing for positions, it could hardly be called party-political. I am about to surrender my next two weeks of spare time to campaign for a friend who isn’t in the Labour party and strongly disagrees with me on a ton of issues, but to me, all that is irrelevant- I firmly believe he is the best person for the position he’s going for and will make a real and hugely positive difference for students, and that’s all that matters to me. It makes a lovely change from Labour Party campaigning, not because I don’t love spending cold Sundays shoving leaflets through letterboxes, but because each candidate is standing on a personal set of goals and values rather than toeing the same old party line. This is campaigning for a person, not a party, and for specific jobs, rather than general representatives, and this is what makes it special.
Tom Marley- “I’m gonna buy Obama’s book tomorrow!”
Me- “Er, what does audacity acutally mean?”
Tom Marley- “Dunno. Sounds good, though.”
For the benefit of Tom, our friends at dictionary.com define audacity as
Audacity (aw-das-i-tee) -noun, plural -ties.
1. Boldness or daring, esp. with confident or arrogant disregard for personal safety, conventional thought, or other restrictions.
2. Effrontery or insolence; shameless boldness: His questioner’s audacity shocked the lecturer.
3. Usually, audacities. audacious acts or statements.
Last Friday I embarked on what is for me a very rare event. Me and two female friends went for a girl’s night out.
Dressed fairly modestly by the standards of our peers, in boots, jeans and not-too-low tops, we set out down our road, on a mission to visit the cashpoint, a pub, and a club.
We had barely been on the main road a minute when a guy stopped us. In his twenties, he asked us if the Guild was open that evening, if we were going and if he could get tickets. We explained it wasn’t a club night, but he kept asking where we were off to. I politely told him to sod off and we continued on the remaining ten meter stretch to the cash point.
At the cashpoint, we attracted more attention. A drunk man told me and my two friends in turn that we were attractive. We turned away from him to attend to the traffic lights next to us, only for a car to go past full of lads honking their horn and shouting at us.
Finally across the road, we eventually made it into a pub. On entry an older male punter came up to investigate us before giving up and sitting down again. The barman was very friendly, and we got served very quickly despite it being busy- he even set out stools for us around the bar and kept coming back to see if we wanted more drinks. (The rest of the night was fun but largely irrelevant to this post.)
The point of this story is this. It was lovely to be treated so well in the pub- but I have never been treated that well when I’ve been out with guys. All the attention and leering men in the street, I have never encountered when out with the guys. Being a woman I’ve of course experienced all this before when out with the girls, but the sheer volume of it in such a short space of time that night left me gaping. When the guys were at home the world was a different place- my friends and I were seen differently, were treated differently, and it was very, very disconcerting.
I was drawn into another debate tonight on the nature and practicalities and need for women’s liberation campaigns (of the nature practiced by Labour Students, NUS and the University of Birmingham Guild of Students). I found myself defending the existence of the campaigns on the basis of underepresentation and pay discrepancies, to a friend who sees no need for such campaigns as she considers herself equal to men in mindset and opportunity. I’ve never considered myself any less worthy of anything because of my gender, and on reflection over the long discussion it occurred to me that there were two things we needed to fix: men’s perception and treatment of women, and women’s perceptions and treatment of themselves. I shared that little story above because it is the clearest most recent reminder I’ve had of the first of those two points- of how an awful lot of men see women. That brief walk to my local pub was unpleasant and unsettling and a pertinent reminder that we’ve got a lot to fix.
It’s house hunting season here in Selly Oak, and The Housemates and I are on the prowl. Having spent the last two years enjoying good value accomodation (I live in a spacious and modern house for £55 ppw) we are breaking up and downsizing, and having surveyed some cheap dumps over the last few days, my group looks almost certain to face a rent hike.
This is going to hurt. Or at least, it will hurt some of us. For this is where we come to the big chip on my shoulder/grudge against the system; some will have their rent paid for them by their parents. There is nothing wrong with parents doing this, but there is something very, very wrong with the loan and grant systems for failing to take this into account.
Allow me to blind you with figures for a minute. My rent comes to £2860 per year. My loan, meanwhile, is £3627. This means my rent takes up 79% of my loan. It has been worse; in my first year in halls rent far exceeded my loan. For me, and thousands of other students, our parents cannot or will not pay us full rent; we must pay it ourselves, from this loan. Those whose parents chip in the full amount for them are left with almost five times more money in their pocket.
It’s hard to write this article without sounding jealous or “bleeding heart”ish. But the effect to me is plain. I have many friends who pay their own rent who have admitted to me that they shy away from nights out and socialising to save on funds. It also follows that those of greater means are going to be the ones living in the more expensive homes, further socially segregating us. (This has happened to my housemates this year, with the two of greatest income having chosen to spend next year in a more expensive flat together, which includes parking spaces for their cars.) I am looking at rents of £65 a week and wincing- it’s only ten pounds more a week, but it’s really, really going to hurt. And I am luckier than some, in that while my parents don’t pay my rent they still top up my income to the amount of the maximum income assessed loan.
There are only two solutions to this; either grants and loans go up, or rent goes down. A mate and I were setting the world to rights one afternoon, and decided that in the case of the former, we’d like to see a separate rent loan be made available to those who want it. This would be much in the same way that a tuition fee loan is only granted if you ask for it; you still have the option to pay it upfront, and your housing contract would determine how much you got. I couldn’t give a toss about being saddled with debt for the rest of my life if don’t have the money to put a roof over my head for the next year.
What shocked me most when starting at university was the cost of hall fees. According to the manifesto of one of this year’s NUS Welfare Officer candidates, only 12% of university of University of Birmingham accomodation has rent equal to a base rate student loan. This is absolutley astonishing. In my first year I scraped by on a bursary awarded to me on the basis of my A-Level grades, not my income; had I achieved lesser grades I simply don’t know what I would have done.
Why is rent, both private and Univerity so high, why are student loans not sufficient to cover it, and when will the system take into account rent and whether students or parents will pay it when awarding grants and loan extensions?
2) The use of the term “uncomradely behaviour”- awesome!! I love the way we members are all vague “colleagues” or “friends” (when Tom Geese is not around), and the moment anyone does anything wrong suddenly we are supposed to be close knit ”comrades” again.
3) Their giant inflatable ballot box kinda dwarfs the Guild’s big green vote sign.
Because I am not at all bitter about being stuck in my house with an exam in the morning and no one to watch Super Tuesday coverage with, I am going to blog about something entirely un-Super Tuesday related.
So, yeah, three thousand people. That’s how many council staff flooded Birmingham’s Victoria Square today in protest over the new pay scheme being introduced by Birmingham city council. The issue seems to be a tricky one; while the pay shake-up is designed to bring balance to the gender pay gap by valuing male and female jobs equally (hurrah) allegations abound that it will not in fact achieve that. Also, and highly significantly, many staff are set to lose life-changing amounts (up to twelve grand in some cases).
The issue has been dogged with controversy, not least the binmen pay deal, which was accepted against union advice. It has also been alleged that the council has long since spent the money set aside to neutralise the pay cuts on other things.
What has really interested me here is the position of the unions. As the Birmingham Post points out, less than 1/4 of members voted in the strike ballot and the binmen rejected union advice… Still, three thousand people took to the streets today.
Which is the number needed for a quorate referendum in my own union this week, the Guild of Students. I wonder how this union will fare? Since there is no money at stake here I fear far less well… but I hope I’m wrong.
And I have been up for god knows how long, doing impossibly ridiculous questions about superconductors for a deadline tomorrow (today, bugger).
It’s just occurred to me it’s going to be a busy week- Super Tuesday is on, er Tuesday (I want to stay up but I have a class test the next morning! This is RUBBISH, it would never happen in the politics department!)
Also all this week the Guild of Students at the University of Birmingham will be waiting nervously for the results of the referendum on the new constitution to roll in- this will prove something of an acid test for student apathy as we battle to reach quoracy of 2800andsomething … what’s that I hear you say, we need one vote every 155 seconds for the next five days straight? Youch…
…We also have the BULS nomination meeting for Labour Studentsy stuff (on Weds from 7-9, gc chambers), and of course on Saturday the First Annual Selly Oak Branch Labour Party Curry Evening to look forward to…
Right, enough blogging, back to my NIS junctions. *sigh*. I think dawn might break soon…
The bin-men of Birmingham have dismayed unions by voting to accept a £8000 a year pay rise, which coupled with the cancellation of bonusses means in real terms a £2000 a year cut.
The Labour group on the Council had accused the Tory administration of “holding a gun to their heads” over the pay deal, and it has been suggested that the bin-men had voted to “cut their losses”. The Tory administration meanwhile believes the workers have “seen sense” in accepting reformed working practices, which come with the deal.
There have been anonymous (and entirely unconfirmed) suggestions that the pay ballot was somewhat dodgey… we’ll have to wait and see if anything comes of that or if it’s just disgruntled rumour.
This is all part of the ongoing row over the council workers pay shake up, which will see thousands of council staff walk out on Tuesday in protest over pay cuts…
Let’s hope he isn’t going to follow in the footsteps of Birmingham councillor John Lines and actually turn out to be guilty… or have the whip removed from him like Derek Conway… that would be embarrasing for Cameron, two in a week!!
In all the commotion over Hain and Watson, we forgot to mention on the blog local MP Liam Byrne, who this weekend received his third ministerial portfolio. As well as a constituency MP, Minister for immigration and the West Midlands, he will now be a Minister of the Treasury too.
The Tories were already upset about him having more than one role and are predictably miffed at him gaining a third, although Byrne insists he can cope- and that “it is good news for the Midlands to have a Minister with a hotline to the Chancellor”.
Clearly he is highly thought of and a hard worker- It sounds like hell to me, but if he can cope with all those roles then congratulations and good luck to him!
Having mourned Peter Hain’s departure from Cabinet, BULS needed cheering up. A minute’s applause was led by Tom Guise in celebration of Tom Watson’s promotion this week to Junior Minister, culminating in a BULS salute.
On Friday, 26th January, BULS observed a minutes silence in commemeration of Peter Hain’s time in the Cabinet. We took a minute out of the festivities surrounding Tom Guise’s fifth year of party membership to sit in solidarity with our ousted comrade.
A few news stories interested me today and I’m bored of revision, so here they are.
Firstly, the Commons motion calling for an end to automatic male succession to the throne- I don’t know whether to like it from a feminist point of view or rubbish it as a republican.
Next, the government promising lots and lots of money for more cycling proficiency lessons. I can’t remember anything I learnt when I took the course, but it’s a cheery initiative all the same.
Returning briefly to the no-platform debate, someone from the University of Birmingham comments on it in this BBC article…
And finally, because I am a geek at heart, I was happy to see some good news about physics for a change.
(Oh and something really bad happened with the money markets, but because I don’t actually have any money I didn’t take much notice. I’m sure someone smarter than me will patiently explain it to me some time.)
Thinking back to Tom Geese’s blog on community spirit, I came across this when I should have been doing something more productive. The original article is a pile of shite, but the comments below give an interesting if depressing glimpse of the two Selly Oaks- the permanent comunity and the student bubble…
Weary readers will remember that a short while ago we had a blog debate on No Platform Policy. One of the points I raised in my arguments against it was the (ever so slightly provocative) suggestion we No-Platform the entire Catholic church, for the devastating effect their policies on abortion and condoms have on thousands of people.
Imagine the grin on my face when I picked up my Guardian today to find that an Italian University had gone one better, and No-Platformed the Pope. Scores of students and teachers held protests highly reminiscent of those that greeted David Irving and Nick Griffin at Oxford to protest against this denier of science and inquisition-sympathiser being allowed in to speak.
Tomorrow the Guild of Students will be debating banning yet another group from campus, in this case arms dealers. I will be voting against it, and will be very interested to see if the voting profile on this one matches that for No Platform Policy. People have tried to explain to me how this is not the same issue, that arms dealers do peaceful things too and that if our graduates were not allowed access to such companies they would just go to the next campus and pick up the graduates there. My reply to these arguments is that they can also be applied to No-Platform policy; fascists will just spread their message elsewhere, and not all of the BNPs policies are racist (at least I assume their environmental policy isn’t, although if I’m honest I haven’t checked).
I’m scared that we are becoming swept up in a hysteria of banning everyone we disagree with. I have asked the question before, if we are going to start banning people where do we draw the line? Right now the line is to me blurry, and slowly slipping into the distance…
Brown seems to have received a lot of stick in the press today over his plans for opt-outs on organ donation, but the only argument I have found written against it is that lovely old torygraph soundbite, ”erosion of civil liberties”. Unless someone’s religion forbids them donating organs, why on earth would anyone wish to deny the chance of life to others?
Some avid readers may vaguely recall me despairing at the reluctance of Labour Students to support eco-housing, and the insanely long debate we had on it.
Last night at my local branch meeting (which, incidentally, Labour Students also voted against providing information and help for clubs to get involved with) we were discussing a local election manifesto, and I asked if we could include a bit about eco-homes being built in a new housing development. Everyone agreed and the matter was settled in seconds.
Am loving this story from TomWatson, who spotted that instead of their own city, Tory MEPs had displayed their wealth of local knowledge by illustrating their website with pictures of Birmingham, Alabama.
(Ironically my dear parents made the same mistake at Christmas, when they gave me a book entitled A Photographic History of Birmingham.)
Today’s papers went to press before Clinton was declared winner in New Hampshire last night- having watched Clinton’s victory speech a mere five hours before buying my paper on campus, it was weird to see the newstand flushed with stories of her campaign being in tatters and Obama being on fire…
The BBC reports today that foreign students who overstay their visas will no longer be automatically deported unless they have broken other UK laws during their stay. Most would think this is a perfectly reasonable policy which will cause minimum disruption to the studies of thousands of law-abiding, hard working students, who often only miss the visa renewal deadline by a few days, or due to administrative errors.
But not dear old David Davis! The view of he and his party is that “It is astonishing that warped government priorities are dictating that our immigration authorities turn a blind eye to those with no right to stay in the UK”. Is this not a bit harsh on the majority of hard working students who pay huge fees to come here, contributing greatly to our universities’ funding and bringing a wonderful cultural diversity to our campuses, whose only error was not filling out a form on time? Compassionate Conservatism is clearly still going strong.
The Birmingham Post reported today that a Birmingham Lib Dem council candidate has admitted to changing his name so as to appear above a Labour candidate on the ballot paper.
Saeed Aehmed was Saeed Ahmed, until he changed used deed poll to insert an extra “e” into his surname, pushing him alphabetically above Councillor Muhamed Afzal on the May 2007 local elections, and has admitted that this was the reason for the change.
Because I am a sad muppet, I spent last night up watching the Iowa causus results role in. Browsing the net for info on the candidates, CNN provided a summary on how the candidates stood on key issues. What key issues were picked?
Abortion, Immigration, Iraq, Social Security, Taxes, and Same-Sex Marriage. While I am very conscious that this is CNN setting the agenda and it is therefore rather skewed, I was surprised to find abortion and same sex marriage so high on the list and yet other far more relevant ”moral issues”, such as the death penalty, absent. (Nice to see a majority male and unanimously straight group consulted here.) Most shocking and disturbing is the absence of climate change from the list.
Browsing further, I came across this article on the eligibility of American atheists to adopt children. It relates the case of a couple, one atheist and one pantheist, and the opposition they faced attempting to adopt children in the USA because of their religious views. It was alleged by judges that it was wrong to deny a child the experience of worshiping a god from birth. Atheists were recently voted America’s least trusted group in an opioion poll…
America is a land that looks a lot like ours on the surface, but scratch below the surface and in many of it’s citizens you’ll find a mindest that is very, very alien to most forward thinking, fair minded people…
I thought I’d kick off the New Year with a little quiz for everyone, to celebrate all things that change at New Year. You know what changed today? Rail fares!
OK,
Question 1. What costs more?
a) A years rent for a room in my house in Selly Oak, Birmingham
b) An annual rail season ticket between Canterbury and London?
Question 2. What now has the greater monetary value?
a) A base rate living-away non-London annual student maintenance loan
b) An annual rail season ticket between Canterbury and London?
You guessed it, they’re both b of course! Happy new year fellow rail users!
Having spent a number of protest marches being told by the police where we can and can’t march or shout (no shouting in Parliament Square being the most worrying), I can’t help but find it amusing that the police are angry that they themselves are being told they can’t march past Parliament. I realise they are only doing their job when shepherding us, but it’s quite gratifying when the rules they spend their careers enforcing come back to bite them on the arse.
Browsing the news stand yesterday, every paper bar the Sport led with the murder of Benazir Bhutto. This included the Sun and the Mirror, which led with full pages proclaiming “Don’t let them kill democracy” and “The day democracy died”. I wondered how many mentions Bhutto had been afforded in each publication in life.
A quick search of the Sun’s website brought up fourteen mentions in the last year, the most recent pre-death being the fourteenth of November. The Mirror fared somewhat better with sixteen mentions of her in her in the last year, the last of her alive also in November.
For comparison to the broadsheets, the Guardian managed 401 mentions, the last three days before she was shot…
I am somewhat aware that Bhutto’s only mentions on this blog have been posthumous. However we are not trying to sell newspapers, and I can’t help but feel the tabloids are going more than a bit OTT in trying to cash in.
The first elected female (former) leader of a predominantly Muslim country is shot
dead days before an election, and the world weeps.
(Feeling rather sullen as I watch the news, I can’t help noticing that the majority of people grieving in the footage of Pakistani streets are men. Where are the women?)
Meenwhile in Kenya the election hangs on a knife edge amid claims of corruption and a 70% turnout.
And over in Blighty, a group of Mancunians ensure that the wording of a plaque is changed to remind people that people died for democracy here, too.
This weekend Labour Students from across the country gathered in London for National Council. Held annually, this event features policy debates, general debates, policy forums, cabinet ministers and extreme drunkenness. This year we had a fantastic speech from Steve Pound MP, as well as appearances from Ed Miliband and James Purnell. It was wonderful to meet fellow students from across the country (we had a fun if disturbing evening playing “I have never” into the small hours) and we all left London a fair few Facebook friends heavier. These are the good memories I will take from this weekend.
I will also take from the weekend a feeling of immense frustration. It was a huge shame we didn’t get round to discussing a motion on reforming the process by which people are voted onto positions on Labour Students National Committee. The motion was entirely uncontroversial, calling for elections to be advertised to all members and for manifestos to be made available in advance- things which any ordinary democratic organisation would do anyway. Whether these measures are in Labour Students constitution already is something of a mystery, as copies of the document prove immensely difficult to get hold of, but motions don’t get proposed without someone feeling a serious need for them. Sadly it came low down in the priority ballot, and we ran out of time before it was able to be discussed.
Why did time run out? Let me describe the motion that came before it on the order paper. This motion called for the National Office to provide training and resources to help clubs to engage with local CLPs effectively. It was, incidentally, the only motion debated which called for anything more than a letter to be written congratulating the government on doing something well, or for action more specific than a vague “campaign”. The motion was taken to pieces- the parts asking for information to be made available and feedback to be provided were rejected. What passed was a small, stripped down version of it calling for a one-off training session. The main argument against the parts that were removed? That the National Office would not have timeto implement them.
Not have time? With three sabbattical officers each serving a year term, with one specifically for campaigns (the only thing the other mandates referred to) and one specifically to deal with administrative issues, with three years worth of human-power between them there was not time to complete the one administrative mandate? Forgive my cynicism but if the campaigns officer can cope with the eight campaign related motions that passed than I do not accept that the secretary and chair between them cannot cope with the sole adminisrtative one.
The process of rejecting the majority of this motion took such a huge amount of time that we were unable to debate the one I was originally describing- the one that would have brought about internal electoral reform. We spent so long debating motions, none of which I disagree with (except of course no-platform policy, see previous blogs) but few of which will make a jot of difference. Standing up against Robert Mugabe as other new policy mandates us to do is a very noble and commendable thing, but let’s face it, had either of these two motions passed as well it would not have made the slightest difference to the people of Zimbabwe, yet a hugely positive and immediate difference to every member of Labour Students.
This is my frustration. Labour Students had a chance to pass policy which would have made it more relevant, open and useful to all of its members, and it ignored it and campaigned actively against it for the standard reason is that the National Officers would be too busy. As those who travelled to Glasgow for Annual Conference this spring will know, this is not the first time it has happened. Why does it keep happening? Why does good, progressive, and thoroughly un-radical policy keep getting shot down? Why do rational, sensible, intelligent students vote agaionst democracy?
To return title of this rather long entry, at the end of the weekend there was a chance for questions to be asked of the full time officers, and the last question asked whether they knew all the lines to the Red Flag. Lots of people ended up singing it. Quite a few of us were feeling disheartened about the above by this time, and didn’t join in. Remembering those reports from party conferences where the TV presenter analyses who is singing and who isn’t, I glanced around the room… it was a thoroughly surreal moment.
Yesterday brought mixed news on the environmental front. As I read in my Guardian over (a stereotypically vegetarian)lunch that the UK was actually responsible for far more carbon emissions than our good government would have us believe, I was informed by BBC news at 1 that enough wind turbines had been promised to power every home by 2020. It was cheering to see the positive response from environmentalists, who usually take to moaning about bird migrating patterns being disrupted- the one interviewed refreshingly recognised that climate change was a far greater threat to birds than a few large structures out at sea.
Flicking through today’s news items I find that Shell has sold its solar power programs, and that the US is still resisting targets on carbon emissions… Not a very positive day, but I’m still feeling rather happy about yesterdays wind farm announcement. Am I alone in thinking they are actually quite beautiful?
Last night Guild Council at Birmingham University Guild of Students reached the conclusion of a debate which has been raging for a number of years: It decided on the makeup of its future trustee board. The issue has dominated Guild politics for at least the last eight months, and has seen numerous presentations and motions, not to mention the huge amount of behind-the-scenes discussion, negotiating and re-negotiating. It has divided people as those on all sides got passionate about their preferred models. It has created a vast amount of stress for those involved. Last night, following a long debate in Guild Council, the issue was finally resolved.
This week I was lucky enough to attend NUS extraordinary conference, which I shall probably write about in its own right later. The motion passed (!) there was to create a new constitution for the Union, and a number of amendments were debated- one of which changed the make up of the trustee board. There was a short speech for and a short speech against. Voting cards were raised. In a matter of no more than fifteen minutes, it was over.
This weekend former club chair John Ritchie turned forty twenty seven. A BULS delegation endured an eight hour journey to Aberdeen to celebrate with him and had a fantastic weekend! Ritchie is much missed and BULS would like to wish him a very happy birthday
I think we are all aware that Nick Grifin and David Irving will be speaking at Oxford Union tonight. Half my Facebook friends have a little logo as their profile pictures saying “No to Griffin and Irving”. Members of this club are going down to Oxford tonight to protest at their presence. I won’t be there.
This is partly because I am stressed out of my mind with a ton of work to do. This is also because I think the protests are misguided and ironic. Irving and Griffin say things I consider terrible and vehmently disagree with, as do priests, most religious texts, and David Cameron to name a few. But they are not there tonight to say those things. They are there to debate freedom of speech.
I say a lot of things that offend people and a lot of things that people think are wrong. If I am proved to be incorrect in a factual statement I would retract it, but if someone tried to stop me saying something subjective which I believe, I would be angry. I do not presume to have the moral supremecy to say who should be allowed to speak and who should not when it comes to matters of opinion. If we have got to the sorry stage where our arguments are so weak we have to run around intimdating out opposition and telling them simply to simply shut up, we’ve lost the fight.
I’m not a racist, a fascist or a Holocaust denier. But on matters of opinion, everyone should be entitled to theirs, so long as they do not try to impose it upon others. (Before I get shot down I am not claiming the Holocaust is a matter of opinion.) But Griffin and Irving were not invited to Oxford tonight to air their views on race, history, etc; they were invited to debate freedom of speech…
To make a poor and controversial comparison, I believe the Catholic Church has done far more harm in its history than either of these men, and has even repressed and persecuted those of atheistic persuasion (as I myself am)… but I’m not going to stop Catholics entering the Guild.
MPs past and present have appeared in all manner of bizzare spin off shows of late. Gorgeous George kept us entertained in the Big Brother house, Ann Widdecombe brightened up our summers with her bonkers yet compelling “Ann Widdecombe vs” series, and the Hamiltons never fail to come up with something to fill their time and our screens.
Yet nothing could quite prepare me for Neil and Christine Hamilton’s 50 Most Scandalous Videos, brodcast on quality freeview channel The Hits this afternoon. Presented by Neil sitting on a big pink bed, accompanied by Christine wielding variously a riding whip and giant pink bunny head, it featured at number 33 the Bucks Fizz video where the girls get their ankle length skirts whipped off to reveal, er, knee length skirts.
Tom Marley linked to a blog by Gary Hughes last week which touched on the effectiveness of protest… I wonder what they make of the new armchair protestsweeping Venezuela? I was mildly amused.
…Around 360 “detainees” are stuck in Guantanamo Bay. Some have been there for up to five years. None have been tried, or had a shred of evidence produced against them in any court. What have you done in the last five years? In that time I have completed my GCSEs, AS levels, A levels, two years of degree, had three boyfriends, moved city once and house twice, dropped two dress sizes, learnt to cook, visited four different countries, attended three different educational institutions, joined the Labour Party, has at least five different jobs, accumulated a stupid amount of debt, and got through three volumes of my personal diary. A lot has happened to me. But the detainees and their families have been stuck in limbo, going nowhere. The inmates have spent this time… I wish I could say doing nothing… but so many have attempted suicide and none will leave their prison unscarred by their experiences.
…And we sit here giving serious debate to whether we should detain our terrorist suspects for an extra 28 days. The ever increasing limit scares me, but how bloody good do we have it? It was wonderful to see Gordon Brown change Blair’s shameful policy on Guantanamo, but it’s gone a little quiet on that front recently, with him cosying up to the US… I just hope he’s keeping up the pressure…
… because over 360 people are still in Purgatory, going nowhere. I wonder what the nest US president will do with them?
I got a nice letter from the Student Loans Company today informing me that I am £8636.92 in debt. Over £200 of that is interest!! And I’m only at halfway house on my degree…
There has been increasing panic in recent years over the rise in female drinking. Headlines scream at me that I drink too much, that I should cut down, and pictures of drunken girls on nights out have adorned front pages on slow news days. I was starting to feel a bit guilty about it all…
…Until I saw this. On the BBC website I clicked on a link to read today’s cheery new story about how I’m going to die from liver damage, and scanning through it I got to the chart halfway down… despite all the scare-mongering and guilt tripping about female drinking, I’m still only half as likely to die from alcohol as a man!!
Now I realise that female drinking is on the rise, that any deaths at all are bad, that I still probably should cut down, etc etc… but I feel so damn victimised by all those headlines about evil women drinkers I want to go to the pub now just to spite them. Is it because I’ve got a womb, is it because I’m pre-pregnant? Is it just so shocking to see women behaving as men have for centuries?
I’m sure I’m not the first woman to write angrily about this, but it did make me cross… Have a go at all us over-drinkers equally!!
The posts last week about Britishness got picked up on last week by a new blogger on the Golden Strawberry. I still wasn’t feeling the national love from Luke’s suggestions though. However, flicking through the photos from Glastonbury on Facebook, I finally got it…
There was a photo from us standing in front of one of the stages, at a point where it seemed like it had been raining non stop for about two days. Then the sun broke out through the clouds and a massive cheer went up through the crowds… Only the British could cheer so loudly at the sun coming out.
The Birmingham Post has carried two headlines this week that prompted me to shell out 70p for it. The first, on Monday, was in the fall out of the Enoch Powell Tory row… like the Post correspondant, I had already googled the speech, only to be led straight to the National Front website which carried it in its entirety. Reading it left me feeling cold and unsettled, particuarly the anecdote about the “only white woman left in a street”. Yesterday it was suggested Hastilow could still be asked to return by local party activists…
Later in the week it was reported that the pay cuts for Birmingham Council workers could disproportionately affect women. While many female workers will indeed recieve rises, an awful lot of traditionally feminine jobs will be devalued… as if the pay gap wasn’t bad enough. The council has defended itself, saying that the new pay system was meant to make things more fair and equal. I’d be very interested to see who is right- did the council get it badly wrong or is the headline misleading?
On the equal pay front, it was also reported this week that women with degrees earn less than men right from their first jobs after graduation. What a bright hopeful future I have ahead of me.
A conversation with a friend today got thinking about Britishness. I am aware that Gordon Brown is quite keen on the concept, and I got thinking about what it meant to me. Googling Britishness, I came across the phrase “tradition, religion and values”… I was born in Britain to British parents and British grandparents, and have always held a British passport, but thinking about these concepts left feeling like I didn’t belong here. Why?
(here comes the rant)
The idea of looking after British traditions is to me so ambiguous as to be laughable. Does “British tradition” mean turkey Christmas dinners and sunday lunches, two things I have never experienced? Does it mean invading other countries (a tradition far older in this country than eating turkey at Christmas?) On the matter of celebrating Christmas at all, surely we should go back to paganism if we’re going to do this properly- Christianinty was, after all, imposed on this country by invaders! It was common practice for a fairly long time in this country for women to stay at home and men to work, but now it’s not- does that make it traditional and should we go back to it? Traditionally we’ve always persecuted gays, should we go back to that? Oh I see, only certaintraditions… but which? The nice ones? Should we dance around Maypoles (what on Earth is a Maypole even for?) When it comes to traditional British sports, I do know the rules to football, but despite my father’s best efforts still don’t have a clue what cricket is all about. I know how to play Stool-ball (an obscure and ancient sister of cricket), but this isn’t played outside of Sussex, so does that count as British? Does it make me Sussex-ish, even though I was born elsewhere and no longer live there? Ooh I drink tea, that’s British! No wait, tea’s from India, damn. Scanning my bookshelf for inspiration I notice four books by a British author, another by an Indian-born American, one by a French author, and five by Americans. There are also two language books. My bookshelf isn’t even British! The only place I find balance is in my CD collection, which given that I am a monoglot is almost entirely English language, although about half of these are probably American or by European DJs…
As an atheistic vegetarian who cooks almost exclusively non-”traditional British” food (vegetarianism in itself is rather incompatible with traditional British cuisine, as I am reminded every time I encounter a pub lunch), bears a first name that belongs to a country that is no longer even part of Britain (its from Eire), and believes in principles which most of the country don’t (against death penalty, for Labour Party, ha ha) I start to feel like I’m not actually British. The whole concept of national pride is ridiculous to me… Please, tell me how I am British! Until I can figure it out I’m afraid I’m going to have to dismiss Brown’s ideas of instilling national pride as an unworkable concept, for I believe it is impossible to define any group of people by the land mass they happen to inhabit.
(/end rant.) OK, now tear my poorly constructed and hastily written argument to shreds.
Last year, the week before the autumn term began, the Bristol Road tragically lost one of it’s best assets. This year, at exactly the same time, it lost another.
One year ago, all three pizza establishments on the Road simultaneously ceased to offer the 7 inch, two topping, 99p pizza. This year, all three mysteriously and simultaneously raised the price of their next best offering, the 9inch three topper, from £1.99 to £2.50.
Now it would be rude of me to scream “PRICE FIXING CARTEL!!!” so I won’t… I’ll just sit here and munch on my carrot sticks, mourning the death of the cheap affordable pizza.
(with thanks to Claire whose excellent investigative journalism first drew this tragic issue to my attention)
Browsing the news stand today and feeling rather smug about the fact I don’t eat meat (although I’m sure I more than cancel out this benefit with my alcohol intake), I checked up on the latest round of Madeline McCann stories.
The Express led with the hypothesis that she had been turned into a child slave to serve an Arab family, and announced that having a white “curiosity” child in the house was common in the Arab and African worlds. Meanwhile another rag, possibly the Sport, reckoned she had been taken by “Sick Germans”.
Normally I find the tabliod front pages mildly amusing, but these were just downright racist!
On Tues 6th November from 6pm we will be holding the first women’s caucus of the year in Beorma Bar in the Guild. We will be electing a new women’s officer and having a discussion on positive discrimination, as well where we plan to take the women’s cause next. The bar itself will not be open, but Joes will be downstairs and
***!!!THERE WILL BE CHOCOLATE!!!***
As if that wasn’t incentive enough to come along, here’s your sad fact for the day:
Yesterday marked the end of the paid year for women. Statitiscians have figured out that according to the gender pay gap, if we earned the same hourly rate as men, and the same annual wage as we now do, we would be working the rest of this year for free.
The BBC reports today that a Minister for Students has been created. The NUS are “delighted”, I am rather excited. I am sure someone else will write a more interesting blog about this at some later point today!
Browsing the BBC site, I count eight possible contenders for Lib Dem leader… one is female… she has the longest odds. *Sigh*
Glancing at our own blog stats, I count four searches for Vince Cable that led back to our blog. These include “vince cable+jewish”, “vince cable jew jewish”, and “vince cable jew”.
This is not the first time we’ve received hits of this nature… it does intrigue me.
Many thanks to Cory for brightening up my day with this little joyful story, of a Tory donor who a high court judge ruled “would not have given the money to the Tories if he was of sane mind.” Priceless.
On Saturday I attended the AGM of Comprehensive Future, which has featured on this blog before. The group campaigns for an end to selection in English schools and an end to the devastating effects it has on the education and self esteem on those who “fail” school entrance exams. The meeting was well attended and very interesting speeches were heard from a number of people involved in the education system, including Estelle Morris.
In one of the breaks I got talking to a mother who, living in an area which practices selective education, had sent her children to non-selective schools through choice. I was saddened and astonished when she told me how she had lost friends over this- and had even been accused of putting her politics before her children. It got me thinking about the kind of parents who choose grammar schools. Undoubtedly they care very much about their child’s education, and believe they are doing the best for their child by sending them to a grammar school. But the parents who choose non-selective schools are different; they care about their child’s educatoin, whilst not believing that their child deserves a better education than any other. Studies show again and again that children who “fail” the 11+ do far better in a fully non selective system than in a selective one, while those who “pass” aren’t hugely affected either way. While it is natural to want the best for your own child, it is entirely misguided to think that the grammar system is necessarily good for them (the social segregation far negates any educational gain) and astonishingly selfish to want the best for them at the expense of other children.
The trouble is, the myth still exists that grammar schools the answer to class mobility. Until we can crush that myth the education and aspirations of thousands of children are going to continue to suffer in selective areas, and parents like the one I was taking to on Saturday are going to continue to be misunderstood for simply wanting equal opportunities for all.
Studious young woman that I am, I have spent most of this afternoon slumped on the couch with The Housemates, drinking an awful lot of tea and watching the Jeremy Kyle Show. Yes, I know it’s like human bear baiting, but barely worse than yesterday’s pmqs- and anyway, the most entertaining bit was the break. Having first been treated to an advert featuring Ann Widdecombe’s campaign for fresh pasta (“It should be right up there on the political agenda!”) the ITV2 announcer preceded the second half of the show with the words: “Jeremy Kyle- he’s in it for the social justice, you know!”
Who else is in it for the social justice? According to our Fresher’s stall material, Labour Students! I wonder if Comrade Kyle is a party member?…
A week ago we were embroiled in election fever. Now the troops have been called off and I’m curled up on the sofa with man-flu waiting for PMQs to commence. It’s been a busy busy week for BULS. Last Wednesday a couple of us were in Erdington frantically stuffing envelopes all morning, and in Edgbaston stuffing letterboxes all afternoon. This year’s first BULS meeting that evening was fantastically well attended and it was great to meet so many new members. On Thursday, some of them joined us and Gisela Stuart in Bartley Green again to deliver parliamentary reports, and –oh for God’s sake, Cameron is in full pantomime mode today– and then on Saturday, the news came through that there would be no election.
The Facebook status of friends in the Labour Party ranged from relieved to gutted, but it didn’t stop BULS from hitting the streets of Selly Oak on Sunday morning to deliver our new student leaflet to the community. Having informed the masses of what Labour has done for students and what the club gets up to, we hit the pub. That evening a couple of us headed over to Brandwood to celebrate Mike Leddy’s by-election council victory- a lovely evening was had by all, and The Housemates were very appreciative of the vast amount of food Chris Wilkinson sent me home with (cheers Chris!)
Since the last fifty posts have been about the elections I thought I’d change track ever so slightly and look back at the policies that came out of ToryFest ’07. As far as I can see they consist mainly of:
People with rich parents who live in nice houses deserve to be rich themselves once their parents are dead.
Married straight people with kids are better people than cohabitors or the civilly partnered.
More people should be kept in (already overcrowded) prisons.
er… actually I can’t think of any more.
So I employed Google to find me some policy. I typed in “conservatives” and it came up with the Conservative website, and a list of links to different sections of it: the first of which was policy. I clicked on the link and it led me to this.
As of time of writing, the policy section of the Tory website is a blank page. Awesome.
My brother turned 18 last month, and like all those “coming of age” in my home constituency, he received a card from the local MP. It seems that in the years since my 18th the Tories have ditched the traditional Big Ben card for something a little more…er…. well… just check it out. What were they thinking?! I am proud to report that the card was counterproductive. Happy birthday, bro x
… Because there’s a by-election going on in Brandwood! Brandwood is a ward in the South of Birmingham, which is facing a council election this Thursday following the sad death of Cllr Ken Hardeman. Labour’s Mike Leddy has been doing some fantastic work in the area and BULS will be out campaigning for his election all this week.
If you’re around in Birmingham this week and can spare some time after 5:30 Mon-Weds (or any time Thurs!) come along for some pre-term fun! We’ll be sticking leaflets through letterboxes and knocking on doors to remind the electorate to get out and vote and who knows, we might even find time for the pub afterwards…
Whether you’re a first-timer or a seasoned pro, if you fancy catching up or meeting people, drop us an email on labour@guild.bham.ac.uk and we’ll get in touch with details
Over the last week a Facebook protest has sprung up over a motion passed by Bristol City Council concerning Houses of Multiple Occupation, or HMOs. The motion has created a lot of controversy as the City’s Student Unions believe it unfairly targets students, the majority of whom live in HMOs.
In Bristol the motion seeks to regulate where new HMOs, including student houses, can be created, in an effort to promote a “harmonious community”, and to improve relations between “local residents” and students. However, the Unions have hit back saying that the motion panders to the stereotype of students as “nuisance neighbours”, and fails to recognise students as legitimate residents of the city. There are also fears that the motion could be used to create student-only “ghettos” and be used to keep students out of certain areas.
There is an Early Day Motion being put to Parliament covering similar ground, which has gathered a number of signatures, including that of Selly Oak MP Lynne Jones. The difference here though is that rather than talk about HMOs in general, it applies only to students. As a student resident of Selly Oak I am no stranger to the issue of student housing. The local economy is almost entirely dependent on students and Selly Oak Ward is approaching (I believe) 50% student population; in term time the place comes to life, in the vacations it seems to die. While I can see that we are no doubt having an effect on the non-student community, I strongly resent the implication that we are necessarily “nuisance neighbours” and believe we are the victims of unfair stereotyping. While I appreciate that a house of students will have different lifestyles and concerns to, say, a young family, our lifestyle is in no way less valid. A student is no more likely to play loud music than your average teenager. A group of students returning home late from a club is no more disruptive than a night-worker returning home in a noisy car (or than a parent on a school run is to my lie-in!). Another popular concern in Selly Oak is rubbish, often blamed on students. However, the Guild of Students at the University of Birmingham has campaigned for years for wheelie bins and a different rubbish collection day to improve things, to no avail.
If we are living lifestyles that are disruptive to other residents, the key is not regulation, but positive engagement between different community demographics. Put “retired persons” or “families”, heck even “non-British”, in the place of “student” in that EDM and it would be unthinkable. While I understand that there are tensions in areas of high student population (particularly regarding desertion out of term time), simply regulating where students can and cannot live is painfully discriminatory and is not the answer. It’s going to take work between all members of communities to sort out any problems a community may have- and like us or not, we students are part of the community too.
I was reading on Ceefax that the EU has finally given up on the UK’s funny little ways- it’s going to allow us to keep our imperial measurements. It might be rather quaint, but the scientist in me is not amused.
Since they’re going to be sticking around, I feel I probably ought to find out how these imperial measurement things actually work. I don’t remember learning anything about them at school. How many pounds are there in an ounce? How many stone in a furlong? Oh sod it, it’s all too confusing. Anyone fancy a pint?
Last week a student made headlines for putting her feet up on a train and ending up in court.
On Friday I was stuck on train back to Eastbourne with a (slightly drunk) man sleeping across some seats opposite me. As the ticket inspector came round a commuter stopped him and asked loudly why the drunk man wasn’t going to be fined for having his feet up. Reluctantly the inspector woke him up and a short argument ensued between the commuter and the drunk man, while the entire carriage leaned in to listen. Since the man had by now removed his feet from the seat, the inspector decided to leave them to it.
Within minutes of the inspector leaving the two men had shaken hands, had a good bitch about the “state of the country today” and had moved onto discussing which countries they preferred to purchase wine from. By the time we reached Eastbourne I knew their jobs (city bankers), incomes (eye-wateringly high), a fair bit about the state of their relationships and that they each paid more for an annual rail ticket than I pay in rent (ouch). The original point of contention was long forgotten and the drunk man’s feet were firmly on the floor…
I was reading yesterday about Republican US Senator Larry Craig, who was fined for “gross misdemeanour interference to privacy” after apparently propositioning a policeman for sex. In what has been described as a sting operation, the Senator is alleged to have made gestures which were recognised ”as a signal often used by persons communicating a desire to engage in sexual conduct”. The Senator has issued a public statement that he is not gay. His colleagues are outraged and the presidential candidate he had been backing, Mitt Romney, has dropped him from the campaign declaring the incident “Frankly disgusting”.
Is America’s real problem here that Mr Craig may have propositioned another person, or that he might be gay? Today I have spent about an hour in total walking along Birmingham’s streets alone, and in that time have been beeped and shouted at by men in cars and vans no fewer than three times (this is not including the one guy I actually knew, before he comments on this). Granted this is not actual sexual propositioning, but my point is that it’s hardly unusual for a bloke to make inappropriate or plain irritating gestures to express an attraction to, or desire for sex with, a woman or man in public. The majority of blokes will not get prosecuted for such behaviour unless it turns into serial sexual harassment or assault. Sadly it seems quite clear to me that America’s problem with Mr Craig is not so much that he may have propositioned someone, but that the someone was another man. If Mr Craig is indeed gay or bisexual I feel so sorry for him (and his family) and the position he has so cruelly been thrown into.
What really gets to me about Tory policy is the lack of humanity behind it all. Take, for example, today’s suggestion that the one-in-five pupils who don’t reach minimum standards on leaving primary school be help back a year. Aside from the logistical issues (lack of space, facilities, teachers, what if they fail again, etc) burns the question- how the hell would it make the child feel? Being very publically branded as a “failure” in such a way, being held back while their friends go on to secondary school without them, is not going to do wonders for a child’s self esteem. The last year of primary education is already trememdously stressful for a lot of children, with the mad rush for SATs and the anxiety of changing schools, and I can’t see how added pressure is going to help. Taking a year out for extra tuition and catch-up might sound good in theory, but in reality I can only see it creating a whole load more children disillusioned with a school system that doesn’t work for them. There must surely be more sensible and humane ways to go about helping those who fall behind.
Since I seem to be on a bit of a rant, I’ll drawn on a couple of old topics that show an equal lack of human understanding, to illustrate my point- firstly, obviously, grammar schools. I see nothing wrong with educating children in classes according to ability, but why on Earth is there a need to segregate them into different schools? It’s the whole “failure” mentality all over again, branding children and families very plainly by their uniforms and school runs into different classes of people. The second is that blog of mine which sparked a bit of controversy, about Tory plans to pay couples to stay together. They just don’t seem to get it. Relationships are hugely complex human issues, not business decisions. Education is a human right of everyone, and should not be used as a tool to create social divides. Children can be really bloody harsh, and will probably tease the hell out of anyone held back a year at school. I could go on and on with examples of cold heaarted Tory policy but this blog is probably long enough already…
As a member if Facebook’s 6136- strong “Stop the Great HSBC Graduate Rip-Off!!!” group I was of course delighted to see that the bank had backed down on it’s graduate charge system.
However after flicking through yesterday’s Torygraph, Independant and Guardian in turn, it was interesting to see the different coverage each gave the issue- The Guardian credited the NUS with the turnaround, the Independant claimed it was all down to its sensational frontpages, and the Telegraph reckoned it was all down to Facebook.
It was NUS VP Education Wes Streeting who set up the group which scared HSBC off, and he is quoted in the Indie as being delighted with it’s sucess. I’ve always been a bit cynical of Facebook as a campaign tool, and I wonder if it’s role in this issue is being overhyped to avoid crediting the NUS with a real victory. Six thousand isn’t exactly big for a Facebook group; “Physics doesn’t exist, it’s all gnomes” has more members, and that hasn’t prompted the Institue of Physics to denounce Einstein yet. But then again, with the amount of people who use the site every day (particuarly students), suffering such negative publicity on it can’t be something companies would relish. Maybe I should embrace Facebook for the revolution that it is, but I can’t help feeling the NUS deserves more credit for this than the networking site does.
One of the Guild’s great sucess stories from the last couple of years has been its community warden scheme. This pioneering initiative has seen a number of students appointed to address the problems faced by the population of this highly dense student area, and to improve the sometimes strained realtions between students and permanent residents.
This year the scheme is exanding and the Guild are looking for twelve new wardens to take the scheme forward. If you want to make a difference in our community and give something back to Selly Oak check out the job description and apply!
Cool young person that I am, I am spending my Friday morning drinking tea watching the Tory Policy Review on BBC News 24. Here’s what they’ve announced so far:
Kill inheritance tax! Personally I’d much rather pay when I’m dead, and I don’t expect to inherit anything from anyone because I didn’t earn that money.
There are two many regulations, apparently. They are going to remedy this by “stemming the flow of new regulations” and “standing up to the EU”. Revolutionary.
The greenwash is wearing thin… they want to build new roads. Lots of them. And get rid of road markings to make the traffic flow beter. Great. We need a “joined up transport infrastructure” too. Does that include the railways?
While the eighties and nineties were the time of mass home ownership, this century will be the time of “mass bussiness ownership”. The former policy killed off the council house, so not too optimistic about the new one.
Energy review. They’re going to consider going nuclear! And they want to look at new carbon emissions.
So what I’m getting from this is that they want to cut carbon emissions by reviewing energy suppliers, but they’re going to offset this by building new roads. They’re going to make us more prosperous by cutting inheritance tax and business regulations, but I’m not too clear on where they’re cutting their spending to pay for this. I’m a bit confused.
Today the A-Level pass rate rose again-congratulations to those who got their grades, and comiserations to those who didn’t. I have no time for those who think the exams have got easier- if they were ever harder than the papers I surrendered six months of social life to two years ago then it’s a wonder anyone bothered taking them.
As a science student I was getting ready to moan about the predicted dip in people taking science and maths- but this year the numbers actually rose! That’s put me in a good mood. Let’s hope the trend continues…
Finally a warm welcome to all those who confirmed a place at the University of Birmingham today. See you at the Fresher’s stall!
I was bored, so I calculated my carbon footprint. Answer questions on your home, appliances and transport habits to find out how you compare to the national average! It’s great, it comes with pretty Flash animations and everything…
It’s not the most accurate thing in the world, but I clocked in at 1.5 tonnes of CO2 a year- not bad compared to a national average of 4.48. That’s mainly due to the fact I don’t own a car, share a house with eight other people, and use a green electricity supplier. Still, since we’re all being asked to reduce our emissions by 20%, so the site recommends I cut another 0.3 tonnes a year… that sounds like a fun little challenge! I’ll keep you updated…
Krishna Maharaj, aged 68, is today launching his final appeal against the death sentance passed on him in Florida fifteen years ago. Convicted of murdering a businessman and his son a hotel room, he has languished 21 years in jail; meenwhile, many witnesses have come forward producing compelling evidence of his innocence. This man is about to die for murders that took place thirty miles away from where he was at the time.
Cabinet members and the Foreign Office are trying to save our citizen from being murdered by the USA. I beg you to write to Charlie Christ, the Florida Govenor, and to read about his case at his website. Mr Maharaj may not have much time left.
A little while ago while Gordon Brown was doing the rounds for his party leadership bid, I attended some pre-election rally and got to shake his hand.
Last week one of the candidates in Iran’s presidential elections pulled out following outrage over a picture apparently showing him shaking a woman’s hand.
The same gesture, 3000 miles apart; one makes for a mildly interesting anecdote, the other brought down a potential president… it’s so easy to take freedoms for granted.
I come from Eastbourne. For years I worked in a popular little cafe in the Arndale Centre, serving up teas, coffees, pasties and snacks to the good townsfolk. A little while ago it was announced that the shopping centre would be expanding, to become modern, bigger and more attractive to big-name stores. While I wellcomed the demolition of some truely hideous buildings to make way for it, I was concerned about the effect it would have on the smaller businesses…
Since the plans for the expansion were announced, rent in the existing Centre has soared. First a popular independant bookshop announced it would close, as it couldn’t afford the rent- and now so has the cafe I worked in. This made me sad. I am hoping our Lib Dem council, as well as the Arndale Centre bosses, will be doing something to encourage our small shops to come back and stay, and stop the town becoming just another mass of chain stores… but now my little cafe has been forced out, it’s hard to be optimistic :(
My brother plays cricket for a local side. He’s in year 7. A little while ago a parent of another boy in the squad turned to my mother as they watched their offspring play, and asked her conversationally, “So, which prep school do you send your son to?”
Should I laugh or cry? I know the cost of cricket equipment, coupled with that of maintaining a flat field, is astronomical (and therefore potentially prohibitive to state schools, I never played it at school) but are things really that bad? Hmm.
I’m sitting in my bedroom in Selly Oak, staring lazily out of the window. All the students have gone home and without the rows of tightly parked cars my road seems to have doubled in width. Where I normally have kookily dressed art students traipsing past my window in a constant stream I now have just the occasional builder passing by- while the residents are away, half the landlords in the street seem to be improving their properties in some form (thank God). Instead of traffic in the day I just hear drills and saws, instead of laughter and drunks staggering home at night… just silence. I am living in a ghost town. The shops shut early, the pubs call time before 11, the Selly Sausage has shut up shop and on my walk home from said taverns there is not a single light on in my road. It’s all rather spooky. No wonder the burglary rate soars this month, there’s no one here to notice it happening.
With the introduction of top-up fees, and the shift towards students choosing local universities and living in halls for longer, I can’t help but wonder what Selly Oak will be like ten years down the line. Will it still be treated as a playground by its transient student population, who seem to abandon it every holiday? Will the number of permanent residents continue its decline, or will things stabilise? Selly Oak comes to life in term time, the I Love Selly Oak campaign is wonderfully apt in its nod to New York, for this is the estate that never sleeps… that is, until the lectures finish and the vacation kicks in. Right now it’s feeling sleepy and very, very quiet. It may come as a relief for some permanent residents, having the estate free from rubbish dumping, noisy students, but surely a little bit of all of them must be yearning for the hustle and bustle, for the shops to open late, for the feeling of life that will return to this place in October… sitting here in my almost empty house on my deserted street, I know I sure am.
The floods in Britain have barely dissappeared from the newspapers and TV bullitens since the rivers first burst their banks a few weeks ago. The BBC website today carried an update on how the victims are coping.
It took me an awful lot of digging on the same site to get an update on the floods in China last week, where the death toll from this particular episode is 650 and rising. In today’s Guardian, I found a article about Britain’s floods on page 8, with China relegated to page 17. I know this is easy for me to go on about sitting here in dry Birmingham sipping a glass of tap water, and I’m not denying that the British floods have been anything but miserable and devestating for those affected and the families of those killed, but I’m trying to but a sense of perspective on it all… When tragedy happens so far away it is easy to become de-sensitised.
Random fact for the day: in the 11 days parts of England have been without running water and relying on bowsers in the street, over ninety thousand people will have died worldwide from diseases caused by lack of safe drinking water.
I noticed on the back of the Young Persons Railcard I got free from my bank that I now get 10% off at a reknowned bookshop with it. This made me happy.
(Switching to the Co-op is still on my to do list, somewhere.)
This week BULS had great fun campaigning in Southall for the by-election. The people we met were so friendly, the vibe in the area was fantastic, and standing outside the town hall at 2am watching David Cameron’s Conservatives tumble into third place could not have been more gratifying. Also I can’t imagine a better place for campaign HQ than a curry house, the food was great.
However, despite the double by-election success, there’s one thing thats been bothering me. Between Sedgefield and Ealing Southall, 23 candidates stood. Only one was a woman.
Cameron’s new proposals on married tax benefits are nothing short of a vile insult to every single parent, unmarried couple and gay person in this country. How dare he suggest that these people are not fit to raise children? That somehow being in a state of matrimony, no matter how unhappily, automatically improves the life of the children you care for? That I as a woman will not be capable of looking after any potential offspring until there is a ring on my finger and a man in my bed? Marriage is an idea that suits some people very well and others very poorly. Marriage is not available to same-sex couples and this policy is therefore very blatantly homophobic.
The policy is also completely devoid of logic. Having figured out that kids with unmarried parents are “disadvantaged”, the Tories decide to throw more money at those who are doing just fine anyway. Great, that’ll help! If children with unmarried parents are “failing”, we need to figure out why. Are their single or unmarried parents the problem, or is perhaps society inherantly biased towards the traditional family unit? Are children “disadvantaged” because their mum hasn’t fallen in love with a man, or because the state isn’t supportive enough her trying to balance work and childacre alone, or perhaps her and the woman she fell in love with instead? Bribing people who do not want a marriage into entering into one is a recipe for disaster. Promoting marriage as the pinnacle of aspiration is going to just lead to further social exclusion and stigmatisation of the unmarried, and make things worse for the children who are “failing”. Messyrs Cameron and Duncan Smith, you disgust me. Stop insulting loving, responsible, hard working parents and start treating all parents and children with respect.
Watching the special schools edition of Question Time the other night, my blood predictably approached boiling point a few times, but what really made me angry was a comment from Douglas Murray. Described variously as “Britain’s only neo-conservative”, and the “Right’s Michael Moore”, he suggested that a university education should be the preserve of the “gifted”. Hats off to Davina McCall for her response- “Well hang on, I’m not “gifted”, but I would still have liked the choice to go to university.”
Talking about educating the “gifted” and leaving everyone else out in the cold is elitist bollocks. If you want an education, if you want to work hard for qualifications, if you want to expand your mind, why the hell shouldn’t you be allowed to?
It’s like saying that only those who are already physically fit should be allowed to go to the gym, because everyone else might get out of breath. Grr.
On May 3rd, John Lines was re-elected to his Bartley Green seat on Birmingham Council. This made me rather angry.
Why do I pick out this particular Tory? Is it because I spent months of phone canvassing and weeks of leafleting for John Ritchie, his Labour challenger (culminating in an insane 5am-10pm stint of campaigning on election day, and us all falling asleep at 5am the next morning in my lounge, post-count while the BBC coverage blared on the telly and the pizza grew cold)?, is it because after all that I’m bitter we didn’t win? Nope – I’m delighted by our result, we bucked the national trend and increased our share of the vote. I’m angry because I know what John Lines is really like. This man, I am afraid, is no ordinary Tory.
Shortly after his first election in the early 80s, Lines was convicted of assault. Following a dispute with a neighbour over a greenhouse, it appears he battered his neighbour’s son-in-law with a wooden plank, before throttling him to the ground. A Birmingham Mail article describes how “his victim suffered a bruised shoulder, headaches and dizziness for a week after the attack.” Now I believe we can all redeem ourselves, but astonishingly, a full 20 years later, Lines was showing no remorse, stating of the incident that “I was just defending my property. I think everyone in Birmingham has the right to do that.” Furthermore, it appears he did it again! In 2004, on the evening of his last election win, Lines attacked a barman in a pub car park, because he had refused to serve him after licensing hours finished. Yep, read all about it here.
It appears Lines can be something of a “Neighbour from hell”. While promising to crack down on antisocial behaviour, it was alleged that he had made life more than miserable for former neighbours, going beyond initial name calling to posting rubbish through letter boxes. One woman left saying she was “frightened to even leave the house”. It’s all here.
I’m not finished. Lines believes that providing the same housing services for asylum seekers as for ordinary council tenants is a “waste of money”. Does this man have any comprehension of why people seek asylum, of the horrors and often certain death they are fleeing? I hope not, because if he did and still kept to this policy the man would have no heart to speak of. Lines was nominated to be Birmingham’s mayor a few years back, but fellow councillors rejected him, citing him as “unsuitable for a multicultural city like Birmingham.” Is that a polite way of saying racist? Perhaps- 255 of Bartley Green’s former BNP voters found Lines quite to their tastes, and gave him the majority of his swing vote. He has been quoted urging people to vote against local MP Giesela Stewart because she was a “kraut,” and suggested we should “vote British, not for a German”. While we were out campaigning, we noticed that Lines failed to mention that he was Conservative on the majority of his election material… why not? Our campaign material was Labour and proud. Oh, and for more anti-asylum reading, it would appear that asylum seeker support groups are having trouble securing funds from him…
I bet a fair few of the people of Bartley Green weren’t aware of the above, which is fair enough, since his criminal record and BNP-esque policies didn’t quite make it onto his campaign material. I said I believe we can all change, so I’ll leave you with this hope, that after 20 years of questionable behaviour he’ll clean up his act and start acting responsibly and compassionately in this coming term in office… you never know, eh?
As Tony Blair departs, I thought I’d share with you for the first time some of my real personal diary… three genuine (and for boredoms sake heavily abridged) entries written by my ten year old self, detailing the days around that momentous election in 1997. It appears to have excited me as much then as elections do now… Christ, I was a sad child
Tues, 29th April 1997 (extract)
I met David Lines on the way from Roselands! [my brothers’ school] He is very nice. He is the Labour Party candidate for Eastbourne. He wore a red rosette, a suit and carried a clipboard. He was going to go to Roselands to stand at the gates and introduce himself when the children came out. Mum told him he had missed them, so he stopped to chat with Mum. He asked about the election and she said she would vote Labour. It was an excellent day, and great to see David Lines. I wish I got his autograph! I only just thought of it.
Thursday 1st May 1997 (extracts)
Today is election day. I want Labour to win. It was hot today…. at lunch we ate outside and made daisy chains… it was a fabulous day. It is 9.05.
Friday 2nd May 1997
LABOUR WON THE ELECTION!!!!! Yes, Labour won the election. I got up and went in to Mum and Dad’s room. Mum and Chris were in there, I was excited, and I asked Mum who won. She told me it was bad news for Eastbourne- Conservative won. But LABOUR WON THE BIG WHOLE GENERAL ELCTION!!!!!! I was very pleased. Tony Blare (sic) is now prime minister. I watched the news in the morning and I saw the election charts and there were pictures of Tony Blare and his wife. I had breakfast in the front room. Then, on the way back to school I talked about it with James… It was hot. I didn’t wear a tie. We sat on the grass and made daisy chains…I watched Blue Peter and then the 6 o clock news. They did an election special… Labour won and their colour s red, so I wore a red hairband to school. I also wore my cap. Tony Blare is the youngest prime minister since 1812 and he is in his 40s! It is 9.50pm. Everyone else except dad and me is asleep. I want to remember this day for the rest of my life. I want to do something to mark the occasion, but it is a bit too late because I cant think of anything and I only thought of marking today a few minuets ago. It was very hot, and a “so good I can’t describe it day!” yours, Brigid Jones.
Most people have no qualms about placing a tactical vote under a Single Transferable Vote system; it is standard practice to place ones preferred candidate first, and RON second. However, voting tactically in a First Past The Post (FPTP) system is a different issue, for it requires the voter to select a second or maybe even third choice candidate instead of those who they would normally choose, in order to prevent a highly undesirable candidate from winning. It is a sad quirk of our electoral system that so many of us feel forced to do this in order to make ourselves heard- in my first general election I voted tactically, I intend to do so again. A description if the politics of my home constituency may explain why.
I live in Eastbourne, traditionally seen as a retirement haven on the south coast but now in fact a fast growing town of young families and professionals, with an vibrant town centre and seafront. The town has had a Conservative MP since 1945, apart from a brief Lib Dem win in a by-election following the murder of our then MP Ian Gow by the IRA. The second party in the town is the Liberal Democrats, who at the last general election achieved 41.14% of the vote to the Tories 43.46%. The Labour party is almost non-existent. In 2005 they achieved only 10.89%, and in the local council elections they came fourth to the Greens in all but one ward. Our present Tory MP is to me, simply repulsive. He has voted against all legislation to give homosexuals equal rights to heterosexuals, and was strongly in support of upholding Section 28. He belongs to societies which women are prohibited from joining. He is beyond tactless; he arrived at a hustings at my FE college to inform students preparing for final A Level exams that our certificates wouldn’t be worth the paper they were written on, and that measures must be taken to stop so many of us passing. I could go on and on about his policies but he is a Tory- we all know most of them already, so I will just say that having lived in his constituency for almost the entirety of his incumbency I am far from impressed with his local work.
My choice at the ballot box, therefore, is essentially between this man, or a Lib Dem. A vote for Labour or any other party will under the FPTP system will here go unnoticed. Our Lib Dem candidate is a dedicated constituency campaigner, and belongs to a party which at present is in a parliamentary minority with a manifesto I can generally support. Who would you choose? I am afraid that my hatred for the Tories here outweighs my loyalty to Labour. I wouldn’t describe it as choosing the lesser of two evils, for our Lib Dem is a good guy- obv not as preferable as a Labour MP, but as a member of a minority party with policies which are vagualy acceptable (if not the most desirable) I can put up with him. I believe that far more good can be achieved by having the Lid Dems control our parliamentary seat and our council than the Tories.
I haven’t been at all involved in the Eastbourne party, since I joined after moving to Birmingham. But having lived in the town for the best part of thirteen years I am convinced campaigning for Labour there would be against the greater good of the town. What we need is a dedicated constituency MP who is neither sexist nor homophobic, and as things stand our only chance of achieving this under the FPTP system is by electing a Lib Dem. To further allay my conscience, I intend to trade my vote: the website www.tacticalvoter.net allows voters in situations such as mine to “trade votes”. The system works on trust; a Lib Dem supporter in a marginal Tory/Labour ward pledges to vote Labour on my behalf, so long as I in my marginal Tory/Lib Dem ward pledge to vote Lib Dem for them. It’s a partial solution to a difficult choice, but in this constituency I feel it is the only choice I can make.
The issue is tricky, for as long as our electoral system stands this will take place and smaller parties will be under represented; however the benefits of stability and constituency link the system provide are considerable and may be lost under other electoral systems. I am not quite sure what I would replace FPTP with, that is a whole new debate; but for now my solution is to tactically vote.
A year ago, in the days leading up to the annual spring Physics ball, a male friend commented to me that since I was going I should “at least try to make an effort; put some make-up on for once”. I informed him that I couldn’t see his face for spots, yet I didn’t imagine he’d be making any effort to cover them up. He didn’t speak to me for about a month. I had never worn make up before, and I knew then that I sure as hell wasn’t going to start.
It’s an old topic, but the vast gulf between how men and women are expected to appear has never ceased to amaze me. I generally dress in a similar way to the men around me, in the student uniform of jeans and anonymous t-shirts, but amongst women I often feel like the odd one out. I admit I take little care over my appearance; my hair is generally thrown out of my way in a messy bun, and my face betrays shamelessly my pasty complexion and the shadows of sleep deprivation that are usually under found my eyes; but when men don’t bother to hide these things either, I feel under no obligation myself. Yet standing at the mirror in the ladies toilets I am surrounded by a constant stream of women hoping their hair still looks straight, that no-one has noticed the slight smudge of mascara just below their eyelashes, that their face doesn’t look too “shiny”. I try to encourage them to ditch the foundation and forget the minor imperfections that will go unnoticed by all but themselves, but I know it’s a battle already lost, and it saddens me immensely.
The tide does appear to be turning; but in the wrong direction. Cosmetic companies are growing wise to the fact that men can be persuaded to become just as insecure about their appearance as women, and are encouraging them to buy into tinted moisturiser and other cosmetic products. Equality is approaching, but in the wrong way and for the all wrong reasons. For as long as the society and cosmetic industry demand it, we are not allowed to be secure in our natural appearance.
Last night I went to this year’s Spring Ball, again with a plain face, just like all the men around me. It took me barely any time to get ready and I needed to spend no extra time at the mirror in the toilets adjusting make-up and fretting over smudges. My spotty male friend was still spotty and still didn’t care. I had a fantastic, stress-free evening. I just hope the other women there did too.
I must admit I knew little about the former Labour MP Fiona Jones until this week, but what I have since learnt about her political career and the nature of her premature departure has left me saddened and disturbed. Jones fulfilled a life long dream when in 1997 she was elected to parliament, but even this early on she had lost the support of her local constituency party. Dubbed an “outsider” on beating a more locally established candidate to selection, she was soon embroiled in a court case over alleged electoral fraud and removed from her seat. She finally won an appeal, despite the Labour party deciding to accept the verdict against her, but the affair had traumatised her and she fell into alcoholism and depression, which ultimately killed her. Since her death friends have spoken out against the “studied, organised and systematic” campaign of bullying her constituency party waged against her, and also the drinking culture of the Commons- a culture that will always, for the simple reason of biology, weigh in favour of men. Accusations have flown that the party let her down and abandoned her when she was at her most vulnerable, and other female Labour MPs have since spoken out about persecution they have faced in their times in office. Is Labour letting its women down, or is their gender immaterial to their treatment?
As a woman studying physics and active in politics I know only too well how hard it can sometimes be to get by in a male dominated environment, and of sexisms inherent in systems that generally go unnoticed by those who are not subject to them and are often unintended, such as drinking cultures. In the case of Fiona Jones, it seems to be this form of discrimination she was subject to- for the rival she beat to her seat was in fact a woman also. Being a minority can amplify any feelings of failure a person feels. For example, on one of my courses I am one of just two girls- whenever I get a question wrong or a poor mark, I feel not so much that I have let myself down as that I have let down the female side. In 1997 an unprecedented number of women entered the Commons and were subject to deep scrutiny from the country’s media. The now infamous “Blair’s Babes” photo pretty much summed it up; the new parliamentary arrivals were degraded through the bye-line and paraded in front of the camera for being “different”. Being part of this new wave must have carried with it the tremendous pressure of expectation, and I can only feel sympathy for the women who were subject to it.
The treatment of Fiona Jones by the Labour Party and the circumstances of her death were shocking and tragic and have raised a whole raft of questions about how the Party supports its MPs. My heart goes out to Ms Jones’s family, and my hope is that the party will now take a long serious look at itself to ensure that no more people fall through the net and are shut out in the cold.
Aaaaaaaaaaaargh. What on Earth am I going to tell the Tory Housemates now? Since we moved into our new Selly Oak house, I have nagged them, perhaps a little too much, about recycling. And it was paying off; they were starting to get good at it! I dropped gentle reminders about our dying planet into conversation every now and again. I congratulated them when they got it right and politely shouted at them when they got it wrong. All along, I tried to convince them it would make a difference- by the end of term our recycling boxes were overflowing and I had to ring the council for some shiny new ones. Success!
Now Tony Blair has told us that it’s not going to make a difference: not a tiny jot. Britain, he kindly pointed out, makes up 2% of the world’s carbon emissions; our nine person house therefore, around 0.0000003%. The Housemates have never trusted Blair, and I’ve spent many fruitless nights trying to defend him… what am I going to say to them now? My beautiful boxes will be bereft of neatly sorted plastics, tins and paper, our pathetic excuse for a front garden consumed by an unstoppable deluge of bin sacks… All of the negative aspects of the Blair incumbency I have tried to justify with some of the good: Faith schools vs rising results, Iraq vs cancelling (some) third world debt, tuition fees vs reducing child poverty; but this one’s a nightmare. How am I going to talk them back into recycling now?
At least Gordon Brown still believes in it all; maybe I’ll just tell them it’s all a clever ploy, to popularise Brown by distancing him from Blair. I guess it’s worth a try, even if it won’t help Labours reputation for spin…
In her first of many regular blogs, BULS Women’s Officer, Brigid Jones, gives her take on Iraq…
Like the majority of people in this country, I was despairing of our government as it followed the US into Iraq; however, I comforted myself with the thought that at least Iraq could look forward to a future without oppression; where every citizen finally enjoyed human rights. I tried to hold onto this thought, as the civilian death toll grew and the country started to disintegrate, but it finally slipped from my grasp when it was announced that Saddam Hussein and his former ministers were to be executed.
Amongst the many excuses for invading Iraq were the themes of freeing the country from Hussein’s tyrannical regime, and bringing the dictator to justice. As it quickly became clear that no WMDs existed, the focus turned to these other two ideas. Last week, both hopes were shattered. Hussein was “brought to justice” for only one crime from his extensive portfolio, leaving millions of victims feeling cheated; then, in letting him hang, the Iraqi government violated the most fundamental of all human rights: the right to life. Hussein’s death was hailed by many as the beginning of the future of Iraq, and this idea fills me more than ever with pity for the Iraqi people. Their human rights are still not safe; while I trust the new government will not commit atrocities on the scale of its predecessor, the fact remains that it is still prepared to kill its own citizens.
What has also alarmed me is the response to the execution. Disgust in the “de-humanising” manner of Hussein’s death has been expressed by many world leaders, but to me this has missed the point: the fact that he was executed at all. Even the response from the UN, which has policy opposing the use of capital punishment, failed to officially criticise it in this case. Maybe it is because yet another reason given for invading Iraq was its failure to comply with UN demands; and Brave New Iraq has kicked off its existence by ignoring the UN once again.
While the mood of this blog is somewhat pessimistic, what I am not saying is that all the blood shed in Iraq has been in vain; I have a close friend who will soon be serving in the country, and I don’t believe he is risking his life for nothing. Once stability is restored to the country Iraqis will surely enjoy a better quality of life than they did under their former dictator, and be free from the oppression they formerly faced. But for now, it saddens me to see that so many of the other things that could have been achieved for the country have not, and I just hope that the fledgling government can learn from its uneasy start.
A few years ago, Amnesty International invited members to send in their answers to the question, “what does a world without violence against women mean to you?” One reply really stuck with me, and it came not from a woman, but a man. To him, it meant the woman he walked behind in the street at night not being afraid of him.
is still full. Iraq is still a mess. Aid agencies still suffer from the funds he cut them; Americans still go without health care and gay and lesbian couples still face a president who doesn’t want them to have equal rights.
just left me deeply envious.
handgun owned by a civilian in Britain is to dispatch a bullet with the intention of killing or causing grevious bodily harm, should gun possession carry the same sentence as attempted murder/gbh?
something very, very wrong with the loan and grant systems for failing to take this into account.
loan be made available to those who want it. This would be much in the same way that a tuition fee loan is only granted if you ask for it; you still have the option to pay it upfront, and your housing contract would determine how much you got. I couldn’t give a toss about being saddled with debt for the rest of my life if don’t have the money to put a roof over my head for the next year.
This 
uck in my house with an exam in the morning and no one to watch Super Tuesday coverage with, I am going to blog about something entirely un-Super Tuesday related.
, which coupled with the cancellation of bonusses means in real terms a £2000 a year cut.
Eastbourne MP Nigel Waterson, the man who has been 
of their own city, Tory MEPs had displayed their wealth of local knowledge by illustrating their website with pictures of Birmingham, Alabama.
y Guardian over (a stereotypically vegetarian)lunch that the UK was actually responsible for far more carbon emissions than our good government would have us believe, I was informed by BBC news at 1 that enough wind turbines had been promised to power every home by 
Widdecombe vs” series, and the Hamiltons never fail to come up with something to fill their time and our screens.
that I drink too much, that I should cut down, and pictures of drunken girls on nights out have adorned front pages on slow news days. I was starting to feel a bit guilty about it all…
with The Housemates, drinking an awful lot of tea and watching the Jeremy Kyle Show. Yes, I know it’s like human bear baiting, but barely worse than yesterday’s pmqs- and anyway, the most entertaining bit was the break. Having first been treated to an advert featuring Ann Widdecombe’s campaign for fresh pasta (“It should be right up there on the political agenda!”) the ITV2 announcer preceded the second half of the show with the words: “Jeremy Kyle- he’s in it for the social justice, you know!”
UK’s funny little ways- it’s going to allow us to keep our imperial measurements. It might be rather 
Last week a student made 
I’m sitting in my bedroom in Selly Oak, staring lazily out of the window. All the students have gone home and without the rows of tightly parked cars my road seems to have doubled in width. Where I normally have kookily dressed art students traipsing past my window in a constant stream I now have just the occasional builder passing by- while the residents are away, half the landlords in the street seem to be improving their properties in some form (thank God). Instead of traffic in the day I just hear drills and saws, instead of laughter and drunks staggering home at night… just silence. I am living in a ghost town. The shops shut early, the pubs call time before 11, the Selly Sausage has shut up shop and on my walk home from said taverns there is not a single light on in my road. It’s all rather spooky. No wonder the burglary rate soars this month, there’s no one here to notice it happening. 
Shortly after his first election in the early 80s, Lines was convicted of assault. Following a dispute with a neighbour over a greenhouse, it appears he battered his neighbour’s son-in-law with a wooden plank, before throttling him to the ground. A Birmingham Mail article describes how “his victim suffered a bruised shoulder, headaches and dizziness for a week after the attack.” Now I believe we can all redeem ourselves, but astonishingly, a full 20 years later, Lines was showing no remorse, stating of the incident that “I was just defending my property. I think everyone in Birmingham has the right to do that.” Furthermore, it appears he did it again! In 2004, on the evening of his last election win, Lines attacked a barman in a pub car park, because he had refused to serve him after licensing hours finished. Yep, read all about it 
As Tony Blair departs, I thought I’d share with you for the first time some of my real personal diary… three genuine (and for boredoms sake heavily abridged) entries written by my ten year old self, detailing the days around that momentous election in 1997. It appears to have excited me as much then as elections do now… Christ, I was a sad child 
Most people have no qualms about placing a tactical vote under a Single Transferable Vote system; it is standard practice to place ones preferred candidate first, and RON second. However, voting tactically in a First Past The Post (FPTP) system is a different issue, for it requires the voter to select a second or maybe even third choice candidate instead of those who they would normally choose, in order to prevent a highly undesirable candidate from winning. It is a sad quirk of our electoral system that so many of us feel forced to do this in order to make ourselves heard- in my first general election I voted tactically, I intend to do so again. A description if the politics of my home constituency may explain why.
Aaaaaaaaaaaargh. What on Earth am I going to tell the Tory Housemates now? Since we moved into our new Selly Oak house, I have nagged them, perhaps a little too much, about recycling. And it was paying off; they were starting to get good at it! I dropped gentle reminders about our dying planet into conversation every now and again. I congratulated them when they got it right and politely shouted at them when they got it wrong. All along, I tried to convince them it would make a difference- by the end of term our recycling boxes were overflowing and I had to ring the council for some shiny new ones. Success!
Like the majority of people in this country, I was despairing of our government as it followed the US into Iraq; however, I comforted myself with the thought that at least Iraq could look forward to a future without oppression; where every citizen finally enjoyed human rights. I tried to hold onto this thought, as the civilian death toll grew and the country started to disintegrate, but it finally slipped from my grasp when it was announced that Saddam Hussein and his former ministers were to be executed.
