Blog

The row between the PM and the Foreign Office Minister, Lord Malloch-Brown, over helicopters, caused me to think about loyalty. I have worked in about 10 different vocations, from hairdressing at 15, through the armed services, engineering and consultancy, and looking back I can’t remember a single case where loyalty within the workforce, and between the workforce and the management was disruptive. Respect has a lot to do with it, but lack of respect for one person does not necessarily mean lack of loyalty to the same person.

The fact that somebody as senior as his Lordship should break ranks is a clear indication to me that he had reached that ‘N’, point when things are not allowed to go on as they are and somebody had to speak out. It seems that the whole of Parliament, with all its fancy traditions, archaic ways of communication, is being brought to its knees through this government’s inability to make up its mind quietly, sensibly, and with taking all things into account, rather than rushing for a sound bite. What I find despicable is that we the taxpayers are footing the bill time and time again for untried experimentation, which clearly doesn’t work, and yet is repeated. I have already written my views on the treatment of the crunch, which was clearly a disaster because they’re now changing the rules again. The expensive advertising on television upon things like knife crime, which are not yielding anything like the return any normal business would expect, is a case in point, repeated constantly in different areas. The way they keep changing their mind about how they’re going to run the Swine Flu pandemic, and rushing to tell us about each change in policy, which only confuses us, and must cost a fortune to advertise and implement, is beyond belief.

It would seem, unfortunately, that Brown is hanging on by a thread, being screamed at by the opposition parties who have the advantage of being able to pretend that they have policies, when everyone knows that by the time they get into Parliament, things will have changed so much, in this ever-changing kaleidoscope of politics, that those policies that they were using as a basis of their manifesto, will not be implemented

On a number of occasions I have recently been wittering on about the fact that the government and local authorities assume, inaccurately, that more people have access to the Internet than is really the case. They are now doing it about information concerning Swine Flu. Certainly the information on the Internet is interesting, sensible and to the point, but if one hasn’t got a computer, or is computer illiterate, then it serves no purpose. They haven’t even thought of suggesting that those of us with computers should copy the information and passed it on to our relatives, friends and neighbours who have not the facility. Nor have they suggested an alternative system, whereby they print the information pass it to all the different groups in the areas, such as Scouts, Girl Guides, photographic clubs, etc to distribute through the letterboxes of the area. The members of those organisations will be more than willing to help in this emergency. In a lot of cases people whom I know, who have computers, are singularly inept at obtaining information. I am a case in point, and it can be very frustrating for the individual.

I don’t know how much the government has spent on advertising, getting advice on how to promulgate information, and actually formulating the information, and printing leaflets and buying pills. It must run into millions, and yet the one most vital part of it is that the information should be readily available, accurate and uncomplicated, and this means on paper, not on the television which is ephemeral, not only on the computer, but in the hand. How often does one have to repeat this for it to dawn on those in charge, that it is basic common sense?

I get the impression that because we have so many people at the top of government, which includes Mandelson, constantly at the PM’s shoulder, that there is confusion among the civil servants as to whose orders they are to obey, and as I suspect the orders are coming as a result of panic, thick and fast, it is no wonder that nearly every day approaches are changed or rescinded. A number of us never believed that Brown’s method of dealing with the crunch had been the right one, and now he is proposing to put everything under the auspices of the Bank of England, that was one of the watchdogs who should have seen where we are going. I have always felt, as I wrote the other day, that we should have had an independent, government controlled bank which took over many of the failing banks, instead of supplying them with money. I believe this new approach, which was promulgated yesterday, is due for a change already. I think the problem is that with a new election on the horizon, panic is setting in, and the intensity of pressure on those making decisions is heavily increased, by the sniping of the media instead of receiving constructive criticism. I also notice that David Cameron is going to make sweeping changes in the banking system. We are living through a period of monumental, rash thinking, at a time when rational careful thought, in every field, especially the medical one, is so necessary.

Talking of panic, did you listen to and see the behaviour of the leader of the Conservative party out on the stump at Norwich North, making daily visits to ensure a win, fighting the fact that the electorate still fancied the man he had forced to resign, if I translate the reasons given. Talk about panic! I suspect he is trying to justify himself to the party.

I started my IT skills with the BBC computer, and have been advancing slowly but steadily ever since. With time the amount of information available has become so extraordinarily vast and complex, that it is only those who surf the Net regularly who can find things easily. Due to my immobility, and the fact that my doctor tells me that complete cure is unlikely, I decided to buy a motorised wheelchair. I have never been a competent surfer, and in consequence when I was looking to find out what was available, the choices, and all the other things one needed to know, I found I was being directed up dozens of wrong alleys, because I was using the wrong vocabulary. Purely by chance I discovered that the government had a website which guided me beautifully into all the parameters that I was looking for, but I only found it after about a total of three hours, covering five attempts. The question that I ask is, is it the system or me?

A week or so ago I wrote a piece extolling the merits of the Citizens Advice Bureau, I sent a copy to my MP, and very dedicated lady, who because she approved of what I said, passed it on to the local Minister, who kindly replied to her. I had been suggesting that not sufficient funding was given to the CAB, because it had been my experience that it was very difficult to get hold of them as they were so busy. My main reason was that too many people seem to be making too much money in guiding those of us who are in financial straits, when the CAB delivered it free. The Minister sent a reply, which was passed on to me, that showed just how many government initiatives are out there to help the average person having a problem. Once I have permission to quote this letter I propose to do a piece that sets out all this information.

I think it’s a great pity that quality information, essential for all, is so difficult to find, for the uninitiated in computer surfing. It seems one has to wade through pages of titles of websites, if you don’t exactly get the right vocabulary in the initial question. From this experience it is absolutely clear to me at any rate, that the government is doing more than it would appear, or getting the credit for. The real problem is that all those in control, the government, the local authorities, and advisory bodies, all seem to take the view that everybody has a computer, and is computer literate, and this is not the case, may I suggest that the figure is nearer 20%, if you ignore the children. Yet they send the information on the Internet, about things like dustbin emptying, when previously it was sent by mail.

There is a dichotomy in government outpourings. Soon they are bringing out a White Paper on the prognosticated, future cost of the elderly to the national budget., suggesting they will live to be a hundred years old. Concurrently they are spending millions on advertising the effects of obesity, and other reasons for staying healthy, which implies that future generations may die younger, and this does not take account of the new virulent viruses, which are anticipated. I wrote the following a few days ago, and it is equally applicable to the elderly

My experience enables me to warn the young in particular, to be wary of being overconfident in precarious situations. I have neither a big ego, nor am I vain, those were thoroughly knocked out of me between 1935 and 1940. Recently I had a severe accident, which damaged my shoulder, and crushed my spine. This changed my outlook, and in particular my consideration of other people. Most are generous with their thoughts, and their time for people who are ill or disadvantaged. This is a momentary condition, a reaction to the knowledge, not something to carry with you unless you have a responsibility to those people. So, until I found myself trapped in my house, dependant very much on relatives, friends and professionals for those daily mundane necessities we all take for granted, like shopping, picking things up off the floor, climbing stairs, driving, going for walks and personal hygiene, when I heard of the young men and women, damaged on the Ski slopes, it never occurred to me just how much their lives had changed. Workers in the social services, the hospitals and the medical profession are all well aware of these features, take account of them, and help as much as they can.

Initially one is so concerned with the mechanics of being ill, the time spent in hospital, and doing all the exercises you are told to do to get better. After a while you return home, this alone is a steep learning curve because everything is circumscribed by your current ability, your physical condition, and your mental outlook. You will either get better and become your old self, slightly bettered, and a hell of a lot wiser, or you will reach a plateau of discomfort and ability which is unlikely to change in the future, and may become worse with time. It is then that it is essential that your mind is stimulated and becomes the focus of your being, to enable you to block out the repetition, the closed environment, and instead, find useful things to do to justify your existence in your own conception, irrespective of what others feel. It is difficult for extroverts, and even more difficult for the reticent. Sedentary interests are essential, because it is not long before the attraction of television wanes. Once I worked with a team to provide a weekly vocal newsletters for the blind which not only included local news, but had other interesting sidelines for simulation. The social services are excellent in their attention, help both physical and instructional, but what I find is not available is stimulation as a commodity, designed to help and encourage those who have not had the benefit in their early life of different cerebral interests, perhaps their work was their hobby. There is always a local library, but that in itself is not enough. The problem is that the handicapped are often prisoners not only in their own home but in their own mind. Therefore there is a need, especially for the more mature handicapped to be offered stimulation at intervals, that not only widens the horizon, but gives them something to look forward to.

It seems that anything goes in this battle of the parties, fighting an ephemeral election, before it has been called, when the public have never been so apathetic and so terribly incensed at politics. The politicians seem to forget that decorum is the one thing that the public seeks in its representatives, and when it sees them, time and again, literally screaming at one another across the dispatch boxes, on the same subject, any faith is shattered, as the analogy the public gets is of schoolboys fighting in the cycle shed.

I accept, that matters of policy must be discussed, and open government is essential, but when something as delicate as the lives of our armed, fighting forces is at stake, I would have thought it was totally unnecessary to repeatedly go over the same ground, by every party, and every department, to justify themselves, and by the media in every quarter. I refer, obviously, to the debate concerning the quality and quantity of the provisions for security on the battle-ground. The bad taste in my view, is that those who have loved ones in the war zones, having to return repeatedly, and worse still, those who have lost their loved ones, are all having this matter repeatedly thrust at them, visually on TV, on the radio and in the press, not on a daily basis even, but hourly, imprints it miserably every time.

On a broader front, surely it would have been more logical, more constructive, for all the parties to get together to solve the problems that are paramount, as a unit, rather than carping on a daily basis. It worked in 1939 to 45 on a vast scale, surely it can work on the scale we are faced with today, have solutions found, agreed mutually and put into effect, more quietly, in a more dignified way, so that the sensitivities of the armed forces and their families can be more satisfied, and give relief that the best is being done for them, to the mutual approval of all the brains in the Civil Service and Parliament. Surely this is more logical, as it would also reduce the veiled electioneering.

Andrew Marr, questioned Ed Miliband, Minister for Global Warning, about the future on television, this Sunday morning, and asked about all the effects which would contribute to global warming in the future, and what was being done about them. In the question Marr included both transportation and the flying in of food from abroad. The minister answered all but the last two items.

There are tables which indicate the carbon footprint of all forms of transport under all conditions, and speaking generally, if we reverted to the days when we had a viable railway, and a full public transport system, the carbon footprint of the public transport vehicles, even half full, would equate to a lot less than if each person or two people sharing, were using private transport. This is obvious and yet the Minister avoided answering that particular question, in spite of the fact that at the same time, we had forked out billions to save the banks.

It is an accepted fact that aircraft contribute considerably to the carbon in the upper atmosphere. It would therefore seem, as I have previously stated, that the government of the time should be totally revising their agricultural policies. We should be given the relative costs, and footprint, of the relationship between importing the more exotic food from abroad, out of season in this country, and tunnel agriculture. Even if there is either no carbon advantage or a small disadvantage, by firms in the UK, in producing fruit and vegetables out of season, which seems to be the demand of the country, help will be given to the unemployed and be worthy of more than a glancing examination.