website promotion

UKHamlet–master criminal

Posted: 9th May 2012 by Martyn in Crime and punishment, Urban Defile

The police called at my house yesterday. Apparently, I had been seen driving at 35 in 30 mph zone in February and hadn’t return the NIP form to the traffic office. The Traffic Office had issued a request to the local police to haul me in. This is the trouble with being a hardened criminal. The day was saved however and I didn’t have to spend the night in the cells when I pointed out that 28 days had not elapsed since the NIP had been issued and showed them the form to demonstrate this.

Unfortunately, I wasn’t at home when they first called, so they left a note with an officer’s name and a telephone number with my son. The shift details and the reason for their call was left blank. When he emailed me all this info, I rang the officer, but kept getting his voicemail. Five calls later, I decided to go into town and call at the police station. I admit, I toyed with the idea of a "you ain’t taking me alive, copper" scenario, but wisely thought better of it.

At the cop shop, they weren’t able to get hold of the officer in question despite him still being on duty and had no idea what the issue was. They said they would email him…

I spent last night checking to see all my relatives were okay, including my ex – but she wasn’t in a coma or anything either. So I went to bed worrying about it all.

I finally got hold of the officer at 8 this morning and we met up at my office fifteen minutes later.

In future I will make sure all my crimes are those that are legally catered for under the various finance acts. Lesson learned.

Tags: ,

This week, Halifax’s standard variable rate (SVR) increases from 3.5% to 3.99%, hitting 850,000 customers. Co-op SVR‘s up 0.5% points to 4.74% and Clydesdale/Yorkshire from 4.59% to 4.95%. RBS’s One account jumps 0.25% points to 4%.

Did I miss something? Has the bank rate jumped? No? So how come they’re blaming the "increased cost of funding a mortgage." Are they paying the staff more? Perhaps it’s because the differential between the rate at which they borrow and the rate at which we borrow is at an all time high and they have gotten used to it so they want more? Or maybe they though "Sod it, everyone else is screwing them, why don’t we?" Or perhaps it was just to fund the massive executive pay rises that are in fashion just now?

Answers on a postcard. Don‘t forget the stamp… at 60p a pop.

Tags: , , , ,

Clegg won’t go to war over Lords reform

Posted: 23rd April 2012 by Martyn in Coalition Madness

imageNick Clegg has sent a clear warning to his party that he is not prepared to put the Coalition at risk to force through reform of the House of Lords against opposition from Conservative sceptics. The Independent

He really is an arse. Is there anything he won’t abandon in his headlong pursuit of power? Those of us who have worked the doorsteps in countless elections know for fact that the Liberal Democrats are a principle-free-zone, a party that takes the term ubiquitous to a whole new level. Clegg has really stepped up to the plate though – he’s batting for a new record in jettisoning core party policies. Soon, the only thing to differentiate them from the Tories will be the colour of their ties. Ohhhh…

Tags: ,

The imageOffice for National Statistics have issued some "facts". Their spin is that "while some multi-millionaires pay less tax than the rest of us, it seems most cough up their share."

Official government figures show that 72% of those who earned £10m-plus in 2010/11 paid tax at a rate of 40%. 12% paid tax at 30%-plus; 8% paid at 20%-plus; 3% paid at least 10% and just 6% paid tax at less than 10%.

Looking at it from another perspective: over a quarter of those earning over £10million don’t pay enough tax.

These are, of course, interesting figures but they do not reveal what those earning £1m to £10m pay in tax, which seems to me to be the key area of interest.

Tags: , ,

Lyn Jones: the man for Cardiff Blues

Posted: 23rd April 2012 by Martyn in Rugby Union, Sport

imageThis weekend the RFU Championship "Dream Team" was announced. As expected it is dominated by Bristol Rugby, who have been the form team of the season. Curiously, of the four semi finalists in the Championship playoffs, only one team goes unrepresented – London Welsh.

 

Read the rest of this entry »

image

Has Ed got it right? Can the man who the Conservative media are at great pains to paint as a poor leader be manoeuvring Labour into a winning position? Or are the Tories shooting themselves in the foot now, then hoping they can reap the benefits later? 

As of today Labour are ten points clear of the Conservatives now (following the ten point lead from ComRes yesterday, last night’s YouGov poll for the Sun has top line figures of CON 33%, LAB 43%, LDEM 9%. This is the first time Labour have managed a double point lead from YouGov since March last year) and I agree that’s probably little to do with the public perception of Ed, in fact it’s probably in spite of him.

The sound bites we get from PMQs often serve as the measure by which people judge politicians and that judgement is really a question of how you like your bread buttered. If you like the yah-boo stuff (and I accept that many people do) then Cameron is a clear winner, if you prefer solid, factual debate, then Ed is streets ahead. That allied to the perceived policy vacuum that is the current Labour Party and the unrelenting campaign of vilification in the press, has conjured an image of an ineffectual leader.

I disagree though, I think Ed is getting his strategy just about right by playing to his strengths. The people will see through a facade, so he would be wrong to try to position himself as a combatant in the Dormitory Bun Fight. He has to distinguish himself in other ways.

The question the Tories have to ask themselves is, if they are looking SO good, why are Labour moving ahead steadily? If you doubt that last statement, let me give you this to think about – of the last 20 polls by national polling organisations, Labour has made gains in 18 of them, the Tories gained in just 2. That’s now a trend.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

imageAn interesting proposal, this one: the idea that setting the price of a unit of alcohol at 40p per unit will somehow deter the binge drinkers is completely risible. And the evidence that pricing affects consumption is not unchallenged, unless it reaches the point where it is no longer affordable.

So, what is the real reason behind this policy proposal? Well, the first is to play to the gallery, of course, without actually addressing the problem. Cameron likes to be seen as a man of action and the opinion in the Daily Mail and its ilk is always something high on his agenda. So, they – the Tories – present a policy that looks like it is doing something, but it isn’t really – because they do not really care if a load of working class yobs drink themselves stupid every weekend. They make noises about city centres being no-go areas on weekends, but what do they care? They’re off in the country consorting with their aristocratic and Nuevo-crim friends.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , ,

Another year

Posted: 19th March 2012 by Martyn in Life

gayroscoeToday is my friend’s birthday. Gay left us on 27th May 2011 and not a day has gone by when I don’t think of her in some small way. This, in itself, is interesting because I never met her in real life: she was a virtual friend. We “met” on the internet about five years ago in a sports forum called Rugby Rebels. RR is a curious mixture of people who love talking about the game without indulging in the abrasiveness of other forums, there’s humour, love (at least one marriage) and no little knowledge, and Gay was right at the top of the ladder when it came to knowledge of the game. Over the years she became a very good friend and then one day she announced that cancer had visited her. The following months were fraught and then, one Friday in early summer, she passed away. She is missed today as she was then, as she always will be.

A dyro’th law, Myfanwy dirion I ddim ond dweud y gair "Ffarwél".

Tags: , , , ,

I don’t very often rage at the telly: living-room rage is even worse for the heart than its road equivalent. This is mostly because there are far more opportunities for outrage coming from the goggle-box than anything my fellow motorists ever do.

imageLast night, however, I had a little tantrum at an incident broadcast on ITV as part of their flagship political debate programme “The Agenda” (Monday 5th March 10:35pm), hosted by the affable Tom Bradby. The guests were Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, broadcaster Mariella Frostrup, journalist Rachel Sylvester, and businessman Lord Digby Jones and the point at issue was a discussion about female representation in the Cabinet.

Frostrup made the perfectly reasonable point that there are more millionaires in the cabinet than women, but Digby Jones turned on her and demanded to know what was wrong with there being millionaires in the cabinet.  It was one of those car crash moments where a hardened debater meets a member of the chattering classes and completely cold cocks them. Frostrup was dumbstruck and Digby Jones smiled a smug, corpulent smile then pressed his attack. Again and again.

imageWhy the normally intelligent and perceptive broadcaster didn’t just point out that his question was completely irrelevant because her point was not about millionaires being in the cabinet (although the desirability of that DOES have to be questioned), but rather it was about there being too few women, I really don’t know. The comparison isn’t necessarily an unreasonable one: millionaires are few in number as social groupings go, and there are lots and lots of women, but their representation in Parliament is ridiculously small. Women are the biggest single group in society, millionaires are one of the smallest, yet they make up the majority of the cabinet. This, to me, is a fair comparison and does not denigrate millionaires.

So, why didn’t Frostrup rip Digby Jones a new one? The answer is, of course, because she isn’t a seasoned debater and he is, because she isn’t a politician and he is. This calls into question the value of having “celebrities” mixing it with politicians and demonstrates the pointlessness of it all. Digby Jones’s intervention was fatuous, made absolutely no sense whatsoever and really only served to reinforce the position that rich, white males have a God-given right to make the rules and govern us with impunity.

imageThe truth is, the cabinet is too male and too pale, but because Digby Jones was allowed to get away with his diversion of “what’s wrong with having millionaires in the cabinet?”, instead of addressing the central point “what’s right about having so few women in the cabinet?”, the casual viewer may well be left with the impression that the Digby Jones had made a telling point, which any deeper analysis would reveal he had not. What he had done is create a diversion, so he could present a practiced argument, by pretending Frostrup had said something she clearly hadn’t – this is known as a “Straw Man” argument, but the host and presenter didn’t pick it up.

This drives me nuts and is symptomatic of the shallow nature of TV political debate. In any sensible programme structure, the host would have stopped Digby Jones in his tracks once Frostrup had failed to do so and given him the rogering he so richly deserved for being irrelevant, but the ever so nice Bradby just smiled vacantly and let him get away with it. If they, meaning the programme makers, are going to set the bar this low, then they may as well go all the way and allow wholesale insults, because they are just as relevant as the point made by Digby Jones and thousands of pundits just like him across the spectrum of TV political debate.

Besides, wouldn’t it have been great if Frostrup had turned to him just said, “Shut it, fatty – you’re talking through your arse”? Well, no it wouldn’t, but I’m sure you get my point and while it might seem a small and petty point, it is one that is repeated endlessly throughout the political debates taking place across the world. The net effect is reasonable points are shouted down with irrelevancies, mostly because that’s the game TV plays. AND that is detrimental to democracy.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,