The British taxpayer was charged by the Met office this year £200 million. For that we were given wildly inaccurate weather forecasts, the Met Office spent £33 million of taxpayers money in 2008 on a super computer which was supposed to be able to predict the weather for the coming year. In July 2009 the Met office predicted that August 2009 was going to be exceptionally hot, off course it wasn't, it was wet and cold, in that same year the Met office (using their super computer) told us that the coming winter was going to be wet and mild, it was one of the coldest winters in recent years. In early 2010 the Met office said they would not be giving seasonal weather forecasts anymore because they could not predict the weather. The winters of 2008 and 2009 were incredibly cold and the Met office dismissed these winters as 'random events', the Met Office put the odds on a third cold winter at 20-1. Someone told me this week that they were listening to a Radio 4 program which had someone from the Met Office on it and they were questioned about this computer and its inability to predict the weather and they said the computer wasn't powerful enough and they needed a more powerful computer.
I wonder how long the Government are going to continue to pay for this group of so called specialists to waste millions of pounds of taxpayers money claiming they can somehow predict the weather? I wonder how much money this organisation are going to waste before they admit that they cannot predict the weather a month in advance let alone predict what the weather is going to be like in 20 years time?
What I find amazing is how the warmists like to move the goal posts. For the past 15 years there has not been an increase in global temperatures, so because of this they no longer call it global warming but 'climate change'. This deception started in 1988 when a group of supposed experts brought the worlds press together and stated as fact that the world was on cataclysmic collision with disaster unless we changed our lifestyles. They said the world was heating up at such a fast rate the worlds ice caps would melt, low lying land would be engulfed by the rising oceans and places would be inhabitable because of extreme heat. 22 years on from this, nothing has really changed except that the world has gone crazy and we are now spending billions of pounds every year on green energy that doesn't work.
What I find so frustrating is that all rational argument has disappeared. When any extreme weather event happens it is put down to 'climate change'. When parts of Cumbria flooded this year that was put down to 'climate change', how has it come to this? How have these so called experts persuaded so many people to take leave of their senses? Think about it, the original reason for all of this hysteria was to do with a few tenths of a degree increase in temperature, but because there are no obvious signs that there is any increase in global temperatures they have changed their position. Surely if there has been a drop in global temperatures those same scientists must now admit that their theories are now wrong?
At the moment Britain has 3,150 turbines blighting this green and pleasant land, what percentage of energy have these supplied to the National Grid this year? Answer, 1.6 per cent, the Government are committed to building 12,500 of these monstrosities and they will contribute a negligible amount to our energy supply. There is no way of storing the energy these things produce, they have to be switched off in high winds to prevent damage and when it is exceptionally cold they have to be heated to prevent them seizing up, thus consuming more energy than they produce. On top of all this, none of these turbines are going to be built by British companies and the majority are going to be installed by foreign companies. So whilst the Government wastes billions of pounds of our money, that money won't even be going to help the British economy.
There you have it, you can choose to believe the 'warmists' propaganda or you can spend a little time researching it for yourself and see that it is all a load of rubbish and if we do not change soon this country will be bankrupt and have no ability to provide enough energy for itself.
Tuesday, 28 December 2010
Saturday, 25 December 2010
A few thoughts
It is now nearly 2011 and we are coming to the end of an eventful year. For anyone who reads my postings, I hope you have a good Christmas and New year. It is very easy to focus on ourselves at this time of year, and I am not going to try and make anyone feel guilty for doing just that. But it is important to remember others who are less fortunate, so over the coming year if you have an opportunity to help someone, however little that is give it a go. It's interesting that it is sometimes the little things that can make a big difference. Sometimes just speaking to someone in the street or in a queue at the supermarket can make their day. Making a cake for someone or going and visiting that person you have been meaning to visit for ages can really bless them, and you.
Over the coming year I am going to continue to question the consensus, and I hope that you do as well. Over the weeks, months and years to come we will continue to be fed a lot of so called facts. Unfortunately these facts will be based upon subjective opinion and have no basis in fact. One of the things that has happened over recent years is that as we have gained more and more knowledge but we seem to have gained less and less objectivity.
I started to feel this more and more over the last 3 or 4 years, when I started to read more material which questioned the established view point. Whether that be; man-made global warming, ADHD, mass immigration being beneficial, the dangers of asbestos, etc. The more I read the more I realised that the majority of research into so many issues was based upon no more than subjective, unscientific opinion. And what I came to realise even more was that anyone who questioned the consensus was demonized and made to feel they were the lunatic, and even questioning some so called facts was actually wrong.
Reality seems to have changed and even truths that can be demonstrated by clear evidence is now dismissed as a matter of opinion. Anyone who complains and asks questions can be dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or 'right-wing' extremist. Anyone who questions the wrongs of the ideology of political correctness or so called equality legislation is made to feel guilty for even disagreeing. We now live in a world were everyone has the right to be offended and we now have 'victim groups'. Within the fire service we have a group for; women, ethnic minorities, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (whatever that is) but of course none for white men; I wonder what would if I started up a group, maybe I should do it.
Anyway I didn't intend to write all that, but through everything just remember the truth is out there and don't always believe everything you hear on the news, even from reputable news agencies. Someone once said 'power has now hijacked truth and made it subservient to its own ends', I believe this to be true.
Let me finish with this. We now live in a society which is obsessed with celebrity, many non-entities have been accorded fame and fortune through no other reason than being famous. Many have done nothing except appeared on a TV show, even our politicians have become celebrities. What they look like and how they sound seems to be more important than what they say and what they stand for. I believe the person who has achieved the most through this obsession has been the US President Barack Obama who was accorded cult status through being the first black President. Barack Obama got carried away with his cult like status when he won the Democratic Party nomination, he declared that "this would be seen as the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal". Oprah Winfrey proclaimed Obama to be "the one. He is the one!" She was likened to John the Baptist leading the way for Obama to win. I think the peak of hysteria of Obamamania came when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in October 2009 for 'creating a new climate in international politics' even though he had achieved absolutely nothing. I cannot see this obsession with celebrity changing in the near future but you never know. Anyway, hopefully that will give you something to mull over the next few days.
Over the coming year I am going to continue to question the consensus, and I hope that you do as well. Over the weeks, months and years to come we will continue to be fed a lot of so called facts. Unfortunately these facts will be based upon subjective opinion and have no basis in fact. One of the things that has happened over recent years is that as we have gained more and more knowledge but we seem to have gained less and less objectivity.
I started to feel this more and more over the last 3 or 4 years, when I started to read more material which questioned the established view point. Whether that be; man-made global warming, ADHD, mass immigration being beneficial, the dangers of asbestos, etc. The more I read the more I realised that the majority of research into so many issues was based upon no more than subjective, unscientific opinion. And what I came to realise even more was that anyone who questioned the consensus was demonized and made to feel they were the lunatic, and even questioning some so called facts was actually wrong.
Reality seems to have changed and even truths that can be demonstrated by clear evidence is now dismissed as a matter of opinion. Anyone who complains and asks questions can be dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or 'right-wing' extremist. Anyone who questions the wrongs of the ideology of political correctness or so called equality legislation is made to feel guilty for even disagreeing. We now live in a world were everyone has the right to be offended and we now have 'victim groups'. Within the fire service we have a group for; women, ethnic minorities, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (whatever that is) but of course none for white men; I wonder what would if I started up a group, maybe I should do it.
Anyway I didn't intend to write all that, but through everything just remember the truth is out there and don't always believe everything you hear on the news, even from reputable news agencies. Someone once said 'power has now hijacked truth and made it subservient to its own ends', I believe this to be true.
Let me finish with this. We now live in a society which is obsessed with celebrity, many non-entities have been accorded fame and fortune through no other reason than being famous. Many have done nothing except appeared on a TV show, even our politicians have become celebrities. What they look like and how they sound seems to be more important than what they say and what they stand for. I believe the person who has achieved the most through this obsession has been the US President Barack Obama who was accorded cult status through being the first black President. Barack Obama got carried away with his cult like status when he won the Democratic Party nomination, he declared that "this would be seen as the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal". Oprah Winfrey proclaimed Obama to be "the one. He is the one!" She was likened to John the Baptist leading the way for Obama to win. I think the peak of hysteria of Obamamania came when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in October 2009 for 'creating a new climate in international politics' even though he had achieved absolutely nothing. I cannot see this obsession with celebrity changing in the near future but you never know. Anyway, hopefully that will give you something to mull over the next few days.
Friday, 17 December 2010
Incredulous!!
In November 2003 whilst banned from driving, having no insurance, MOT or driving licence Aso Muhammed Ibrahim ploughed into 12 year old Amy Houston, he ran from the scene of the accident and left her trapped under the car he was driving. Six hours later her father made the agonising decision to turn off her life support machine. Despite running from the scene and admitting driving whilst disqualified he served 4 months in prison.
All of that is bad enough but let's now add a few more ingredients into the mix. Firstly Mr Ibrahim should not have been in the country because he was a failed asylum seeker, then lets look at his criminal record.
2002: Caution for criminal damage
Jan 2003: Fined for driving without insurance, a licence or MOT.
June 2003: Six month ban for the same offence.
Oct 2003: Banned for a further nine months for driving without insurance, having no licence and having insufficient tyre tread.
Nov 2003: Driving whilst banned, he hits Amy Houston and kills her. Sentence to four months in prison.
2004: Convicted of possession of cannabis.
2005: Conviction for burglary.
2006: Convicted of driving while disqualified and without insurance. Given a two year supervision order, banned from driving for three years and given a curfew.
2009: Convicted of harassment.
What I find so amazing about all this is, what crime do you need to commit before our judicial system takes you seriously? This man had been banned from driving 3 times yet still drove, he did not even hold a licence, what is the point of a law if our courts don't uphold it. This man has not only committed a number of crimes but is actually in this country illegally. Each one of those crimes should have ended with Mr Ibrahim serving a prison sentence. I am a strong believer in tolerance and justice and what I see here is these two things being abused. This man has abused our society, he has high jacked our tolerant society and stuck two fingers up at it. He has abused our justice system, and used the insidious European Human Rights Act (EHRA)to stay in this country when he should have been thrown out.
Imagine being Paul Houston, the father of Amy, how would you feel? This man was not asking that Mr Ibrahim serve a longer sentence, he just wanted him to be forced to leave this country. Mr Ibrahim's lawyers used Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which guarantees his right to a private and family life with his children. At the court hearing Ibrahim told the court that he had become a father figure to two children which his partner had had from a previous relationship, he said he even helped them with their homework . This was dismissed by the judge as 'clearly not credible' after Ibrahim admitted he could barely speak a word of English. The judge accepted that Ibrahim's behaviour was abhorrent and branded his evidence as contradictory and unsatisfactory, yet he still ruled in his favour. I find all of this absolutely incredible.
All of that is bad enough but let's now add a few more ingredients into the mix. Firstly Mr Ibrahim should not have been in the country because he was a failed asylum seeker, then lets look at his criminal record.
2002: Caution for criminal damage
Jan 2003: Fined for driving without insurance, a licence or MOT.
June 2003: Six month ban for the same offence.
Oct 2003: Banned for a further nine months for driving without insurance, having no licence and having insufficient tyre tread.
Nov 2003: Driving whilst banned, he hits Amy Houston and kills her. Sentence to four months in prison.
2004: Convicted of possession of cannabis.
2005: Conviction for burglary.
2006: Convicted of driving while disqualified and without insurance. Given a two year supervision order, banned from driving for three years and given a curfew.
2009: Convicted of harassment.
What I find so amazing about all this is, what crime do you need to commit before our judicial system takes you seriously? This man had been banned from driving 3 times yet still drove, he did not even hold a licence, what is the point of a law if our courts don't uphold it. This man has not only committed a number of crimes but is actually in this country illegally. Each one of those crimes should have ended with Mr Ibrahim serving a prison sentence. I am a strong believer in tolerance and justice and what I see here is these two things being abused. This man has abused our society, he has high jacked our tolerant society and stuck two fingers up at it. He has abused our justice system, and used the insidious European Human Rights Act (EHRA)to stay in this country when he should have been thrown out.
Imagine being Paul Houston, the father of Amy, how would you feel? This man was not asking that Mr Ibrahim serve a longer sentence, he just wanted him to be forced to leave this country. Mr Ibrahim's lawyers used Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which guarantees his right to a private and family life with his children. At the court hearing Ibrahim told the court that he had become a father figure to two children which his partner had had from a previous relationship, he said he even helped them with their homework . This was dismissed by the judge as 'clearly not credible' after Ibrahim admitted he could barely speak a word of English. The judge accepted that Ibrahim's behaviour was abhorrent and branded his evidence as contradictory and unsatisfactory, yet he still ruled in his favour. I find all of this absolutely incredible.
I suppose you could look at it through purely legal eyes and detach yourself from the emotion of the case, and I suppose these judges have to. But when you hear the evidence of Paul Houston it is very hard to do this, and I think you would have to be totally heartless and callous not to feel at least a little bit of sympathy with him. Paul Houston wrote this:
"On the evening of November 23 2003, Mr Ibrahim struck Amy. He didn't kill her outright, she was still conscious. She was fully aware of what was happening around her even though she had the full weight of the engine block of the car on top of her, she was crying because she was in a lot of pain...he could have at least tried to help.
Amy suffered for six hours before the doctors advised me to switch off the life support machine... it was highly unlikely she would survive and if she was to live she would be a 'cabbage'.
The image of Amy taking her final breath, dying a foot away from me as I sat by her bedside holding her hand praying for a miracle, will stay with me till the day I die"
What I can't get away from thinking is, what if that happened to me? What is even more heartbreaking is, Paul Houston for medical reasons cannot father anymore children and Amy was his only child. In all of this Paul Houston has asked this simple question, what about his right to a family? Ibrahim on that November day took that away from him.
I do believe this case and many others highlights the problem with the European Human Rights Act, according to government figures, 350 foreign criminals have escaped deportation under this so called human rights act, and we are talking about murderers and rapists. I believe it is about time we withdrew from the EHRA , as too often it has been abused by those who would have under normal circumstances been thrown out of the country.
David Cameron when in opposition said this "The problem for this (Labour) Government is that the Human Rights Act is their legislation and they appear to be blind to its failings. We ought to abolish the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights that we can write ourselves that sets out clearly our rights and responsibilities". Since these word were spoken Mr Cameron has done nothing about this scandal. Just a little aside, we already have an English Bill of Rights which was signed in 1679.
The main problem with the EHRA is, it is probably one of the most ambiguous pieces of legislation ever created. In each country around Europe they interpret it differently, but unfortunately for us our judges seem to take so called 'human rights' to the extreme. They almost seem to think that anyone who commits any crime has the right to a three course meal, a TV, selection of DVDs, use of gym facilities and off course the right to vote. I just feel that justice has been turned on its head when someone can commit so many crimes and not serve one day in prison, and has only served 4 months for killing someone. I have spoken to a number of people about this and I get the same reaction, and that is disgust and a sense of powerlessness. Many people feel that those who are in power do not care and do not listen. When we end up with people feeling like this I believe the country can go one of two ways and that is either total apathy or anger, which could then lead to civil unrest.
I have mentioned before about civil unrest and I do believe it could come to this, because I do not feel the Government are listening to the people. If the people do not feel listened to they may react and it might end up with violence on the streets. This one case highlights how far the people who make and enforce our laws are removed from the people they are supposed to serve. This European Human Rights Act has had a corrosive effect on British life. If we want to continue to live in a tolerant society I believe the Government should repeal this law and bring back common sense to our judicial system.
Tuesday, 14 December 2010
Disappearing Britain
In 1998 the Office for National Statistics (ONS) projected that the UK population would peak at about 65 million in 2051. The latest projection by the ONS revised in 2008 takes into account the unprecedented levels of immigration under Labour and says Britain's population will rise to 77 million by 2051. This really bothers me, we already live in a country which is overcrowded; many parts of the UK, particularly the South East, Midlands and areas around Lancashire are incredibly over populated. I went to see my parents who live in Grays Essex recently and I have to be honest I found it to be shocking how many people live in this area and how crowded it is. I drove to the Lakeside shopping centre which is about 4 miles down the road and it took me about half an hour to get there, because of the sheer weight of traffic.
A recent YouGov opinion poll revealed that the majority of British people are concerned at the current levels of immigration. Even a majority of Liberal voters, 55 per cent were concerned about the open door immigration policy.
We cannot carry on with the amount of immigration into this country. I read a recent leaflet form the Conservatives which was posted through a friends door, and it said immigration was now under control, what a load of rubbish. The truth is, it is not, the Government cannot stop anyone coming to this country from the EU and that is were the majority of immigrants come from. In 2014 under the Lisbon Treaty we will not be able to control immigration from anywhere in the world. The Government have made it no secret they want Turkey to join the EU; a country with a population of 72 million will have the right to move and live anywhere in the EU.
The reason most people are concerned about mass immigration is because Britain does not have the infrastructure to cope. More than 2 million homes will have to be built over the next 25 years, and with the current financial situation it is unlikely this can be achieved. All areas of Government are having to make cuts, even in front line services, the NHS has had its budget frozen which is basically a cut as most costs continue to rise, particularly drugs. Many of our schools are overcrowded and under increasing pressure and with more people coming into Britain this can only get worse. The MigrationWatch think tank estimates that more than a million additional places will be needed over the next decade, at a cost of over £100 billion. The Government are committed to spending £200 billion over the next 10 years on so-called green energy, which is not going to provide enough energy for our needs. The Government are committed to giving the EU over £100 billion over the next 5 to 10 years. With all of these cuts happening to front line services and our GDP shrinking, how on earth can we afford to carry on like this?
The Government are cutting the Welfare budget, which means many who are needy are going to be affected, yet we continue to allow more people into the country who are entitled to welfare. All local authorities are making cuts to every service, including front line services as that means the amount of money that councils have to spend is becoming less and less, yet the population is increasing and that small amount of money is having to go further and further. Does this make sense?
I believe, and I do not believe this is an exaggeration to say that something urgent needs to be done about this. If something isn't done soon, the ticking time bomb of public unrest will explode and will end in complete disaster. The recent YouGov poll reveals this to be true, many people are not just concerned about services and housing but are really concerned about the loss of identity, they are concerned about the loss of Britishness and do not support the huge demographic change immigration has brought.
Professor Coleman, who works with MigrationWatch says this. 'Some argue that a changed population would be for the better, and in any case inevitable in a globalised world. So long as there was an adequate degree of integration, a more diverse population would be more creative, innovative, stimulating, open-minded and tolerant'. This, says the professor, is a view 'that has become orthodox among the educated elite, though not with the UK population as a whole'. His comments register with a large majority of the population, as most feel they have never been consulted by politicians on whether they wanted over 3 million people to enter the UK between 1997 and 2010. And I am one of them!!
We have had no proper debate, as under New Labour anyone who raised concerns over the levels of immigration were shouted down as racist. The view of the elite was highlighted when Rochdale Grandmother Gillian Duffy raised her concerns with Gordon Brown at the election and was branded a bigot.
In a democracy it is only reasonable to be able to debate this, unfortunately our leaders no longer like debate and unless this changes we will eventually see a backlash. Whatever your view, nobody should disagree with someones desire to at least see the subject fully and maturely debated.
A recent YouGov opinion poll revealed that the majority of British people are concerned at the current levels of immigration. Even a majority of Liberal voters, 55 per cent were concerned about the open door immigration policy.
We cannot carry on with the amount of immigration into this country. I read a recent leaflet form the Conservatives which was posted through a friends door, and it said immigration was now under control, what a load of rubbish. The truth is, it is not, the Government cannot stop anyone coming to this country from the EU and that is were the majority of immigrants come from. In 2014 under the Lisbon Treaty we will not be able to control immigration from anywhere in the world. The Government have made it no secret they want Turkey to join the EU; a country with a population of 72 million will have the right to move and live anywhere in the EU.
The reason most people are concerned about mass immigration is because Britain does not have the infrastructure to cope. More than 2 million homes will have to be built over the next 25 years, and with the current financial situation it is unlikely this can be achieved. All areas of Government are having to make cuts, even in front line services, the NHS has had its budget frozen which is basically a cut as most costs continue to rise, particularly drugs. Many of our schools are overcrowded and under increasing pressure and with more people coming into Britain this can only get worse. The MigrationWatch think tank estimates that more than a million additional places will be needed over the next decade, at a cost of over £100 billion. The Government are committed to spending £200 billion over the next 10 years on so-called green energy, which is not going to provide enough energy for our needs. The Government are committed to giving the EU over £100 billion over the next 5 to 10 years. With all of these cuts happening to front line services and our GDP shrinking, how on earth can we afford to carry on like this?
The Government are cutting the Welfare budget, which means many who are needy are going to be affected, yet we continue to allow more people into the country who are entitled to welfare. All local authorities are making cuts to every service, including front line services as that means the amount of money that councils have to spend is becoming less and less, yet the population is increasing and that small amount of money is having to go further and further. Does this make sense?
I believe, and I do not believe this is an exaggeration to say that something urgent needs to be done about this. If something isn't done soon, the ticking time bomb of public unrest will explode and will end in complete disaster. The recent YouGov poll reveals this to be true, many people are not just concerned about services and housing but are really concerned about the loss of identity, they are concerned about the loss of Britishness and do not support the huge demographic change immigration has brought.
Professor Coleman, who works with MigrationWatch says this. 'Some argue that a changed population would be for the better, and in any case inevitable in a globalised world. So long as there was an adequate degree of integration, a more diverse population would be more creative, innovative, stimulating, open-minded and tolerant'. This, says the professor, is a view 'that has become orthodox among the educated elite, though not with the UK population as a whole'. His comments register with a large majority of the population, as most feel they have never been consulted by politicians on whether they wanted over 3 million people to enter the UK between 1997 and 2010. And I am one of them!!
We have had no proper debate, as under New Labour anyone who raised concerns over the levels of immigration were shouted down as racist. The view of the elite was highlighted when Rochdale Grandmother Gillian Duffy raised her concerns with Gordon Brown at the election and was branded a bigot.
In a democracy it is only reasonable to be able to debate this, unfortunately our leaders no longer like debate and unless this changes we will eventually see a backlash. Whatever your view, nobody should disagree with someones desire to at least see the subject fully and maturely debated.
Sunday, 12 December 2010
Students
Students go on the warpath over tuition fees, the press are shouting from the roof tops that these students are wrong in what they are doing. Unfortunately the truth has been mired by what has happened, if you asked most people why the students are demonstrating they would probably say it is because these students are going to have to pay £9000 per year in fees. To most people that seems outrages that they are going to have to pay so much for an education. As usual there are more issues than this one simple point.
At the moment about 50 per cent of all school leavers go onto higher education, which if I am honest is far to many. If we go back in time to the mid 70's about 12 per cent of all school leavers went onto university, this of course meant those who graduated were likely to walk into a good job. Move forward to 2010 only a very few of those leaving after spending 3 years at university will end up with a good job. We are constantly told that those who go to university will earn more over their lifetime than someone who doesn't, to a certain point that may be true. If 50 per cent leave university with a degree they are likely to get a job eventually. Of the other 50 per cent who don't go to university some will get a job that isn't all that great, some will start at the bottom and work their way up and eventually earn a good wage and some will never work. If you take it as an average, yes those who do go to university will earn more than those who don't. But if you take those who leave school and get a job and put them against those who have got a run of the mill degree you will probably find that the university graduate does not earn anymore than the one who didn't get a degree.
In the 1970's and 80's Britain could afford to pay for people to go onto university because there were so few who were doing this, but with so many going onto university this is no longer possible. The question has to be asked, do we need so many people with degrees? And the simple answer is no, if all these people had a qualification which was of any use I would agree that it was a good idea for them to go to university. Those with degrees in engineering, science, Maths, law, etc can probably be sure they will eventually get a reasonable job. Those who have what is called a 'mickey mouse degree' from a 'mickey mouse university' will probably struggle to find any useful employment, that is the truth. I know many people with degrees and the majority of them do not earn any more than me, and will probably never do, and I do not earn a good wage, and that is my point. There has to be a point to going to university, I have discussed this point before so if you want to see what I think please look at my posting from May.
One of the placards which the students were holding said that they have the right to a free education, and they would be right. Up until the age of 18 they get a free education, after that they have a choice, either go and get a job or go onto higher education. Many would argue that because they are more likely to get a good job they will pay more in tax over the years in employment so they should be entitled to free university education. Of course as we know that is no longer the case, as I have said above. Some would argue that only the richest will be able to afford to do this, but that is not true, they do not have to pay the money up front and secondly they will only pay back the money if they get a job which pays over £21,000 a year. And once they start earning more than that they will only have to pay back about £7 a month, that doesn't sound too bad to me.
I believe our education system needs to be looked at and reformed, from the bottom up, many eleven year olds are leaving primary school not able to read, and we have far to many children getting such high results in their GCSE's. Surely that is a good thing? I hear you cry, but the problem is we have so many young people with A's and A*'s at GCSE and A Level it is very difficult to differentiate between those who are talented and who are not. It's almost like our school sports days in which everyone is given a prize and no one is allowed to be a loser.
We have so many universities now it is almost impossible to tell what is a good degree and what isn't, in the late 80's all polytechnics were allowed to call themselves university's so we have now ended up with too many pointless universities dishing out worthless degrees. It is about time our politicians spoke out about this, it is about time our education system was totally reformed, unfortunately I cannot see this happening, so the problems will continue.
We do have an unequal system in the United Kingdom, in Scotland students do not pay for their university education. If you come from a country within the EU and go to a Scottish university you do not pay, if you come from England and go to a Scottish University you pay, that does seem wrong to me. If you are Welsh you won't have to pay from next year, again that does seem rather unfair, so if you are a British tax payer and are English you are paying for the Scots and Welsh to get a free university education. I do think it strange that so many degrees run over 3 years when I am sure they could be reduced and secondly, having known a lot of people who have gone to university and seeing how much free time they have, surely they could get a part time job and work and pay for themselves.
I wrote about broken promises in my previous blog, and I do think Nick Clegg and his MP's who signed a pledge not to raise tuition fees have a lot to answer for. I don't think their excuses about not knowing the financial situation and about compromise hold much wait. The simple truth is they did not stick to their promise and I think this will come back to haunt them at the next election.
In September 2009 400,000 people graduated from university, this year it is even more, that means over the last year more than 800,000 young people entered the workplace and many of them will never put their degree to any use whatsoever. That seems to me to be a waste of three years, I would say to anyone thinking about going to university, don't take the decision lightly. And don't complain when after three years there isn't an employer with arms open and a job waiting. That might sound rather negative, but that is the truth.
At the moment about 50 per cent of all school leavers go onto higher education, which if I am honest is far to many. If we go back in time to the mid 70's about 12 per cent of all school leavers went onto university, this of course meant those who graduated were likely to walk into a good job. Move forward to 2010 only a very few of those leaving after spending 3 years at university will end up with a good job. We are constantly told that those who go to university will earn more over their lifetime than someone who doesn't, to a certain point that may be true. If 50 per cent leave university with a degree they are likely to get a job eventually. Of the other 50 per cent who don't go to university some will get a job that isn't all that great, some will start at the bottom and work their way up and eventually earn a good wage and some will never work. If you take it as an average, yes those who do go to university will earn more than those who don't. But if you take those who leave school and get a job and put them against those who have got a run of the mill degree you will probably find that the university graduate does not earn anymore than the one who didn't get a degree.
In the 1970's and 80's Britain could afford to pay for people to go onto university because there were so few who were doing this, but with so many going onto university this is no longer possible. The question has to be asked, do we need so many people with degrees? And the simple answer is no, if all these people had a qualification which was of any use I would agree that it was a good idea for them to go to university. Those with degrees in engineering, science, Maths, law, etc can probably be sure they will eventually get a reasonable job. Those who have what is called a 'mickey mouse degree' from a 'mickey mouse university' will probably struggle to find any useful employment, that is the truth. I know many people with degrees and the majority of them do not earn any more than me, and will probably never do, and I do not earn a good wage, and that is my point. There has to be a point to going to university, I have discussed this point before so if you want to see what I think please look at my posting from May.
One of the placards which the students were holding said that they have the right to a free education, and they would be right. Up until the age of 18 they get a free education, after that they have a choice, either go and get a job or go onto higher education. Many would argue that because they are more likely to get a good job they will pay more in tax over the years in employment so they should be entitled to free university education. Of course as we know that is no longer the case, as I have said above. Some would argue that only the richest will be able to afford to do this, but that is not true, they do not have to pay the money up front and secondly they will only pay back the money if they get a job which pays over £21,000 a year. And once they start earning more than that they will only have to pay back about £7 a month, that doesn't sound too bad to me.
I believe our education system needs to be looked at and reformed, from the bottom up, many eleven year olds are leaving primary school not able to read, and we have far to many children getting such high results in their GCSE's. Surely that is a good thing? I hear you cry, but the problem is we have so many young people with A's and A*'s at GCSE and A Level it is very difficult to differentiate between those who are talented and who are not. It's almost like our school sports days in which everyone is given a prize and no one is allowed to be a loser.
We have so many universities now it is almost impossible to tell what is a good degree and what isn't, in the late 80's all polytechnics were allowed to call themselves university's so we have now ended up with too many pointless universities dishing out worthless degrees. It is about time our politicians spoke out about this, it is about time our education system was totally reformed, unfortunately I cannot see this happening, so the problems will continue.
We do have an unequal system in the United Kingdom, in Scotland students do not pay for their university education. If you come from a country within the EU and go to a Scottish university you do not pay, if you come from England and go to a Scottish University you pay, that does seem wrong to me. If you are Welsh you won't have to pay from next year, again that does seem rather unfair, so if you are a British tax payer and are English you are paying for the Scots and Welsh to get a free university education. I do think it strange that so many degrees run over 3 years when I am sure they could be reduced and secondly, having known a lot of people who have gone to university and seeing how much free time they have, surely they could get a part time job and work and pay for themselves.
I wrote about broken promises in my previous blog, and I do think Nick Clegg and his MP's who signed a pledge not to raise tuition fees have a lot to answer for. I don't think their excuses about not knowing the financial situation and about compromise hold much wait. The simple truth is they did not stick to their promise and I think this will come back to haunt them at the next election.
In September 2009 400,000 people graduated from university, this year it is even more, that means over the last year more than 800,000 young people entered the workplace and many of them will never put their degree to any use whatsoever. That seems to me to be a waste of three years, I would say to anyone thinking about going to university, don't take the decision lightly. And don't complain when after three years there isn't an employer with arms open and a job waiting. That might sound rather negative, but that is the truth.
Thursday, 9 December 2010
Broken promises
I think a lot of people had a lot of hope that this Government were going to be different to the previous one but unfortunately they are just the same. The only difference between the Conservatives, the Liberals and Labour is the names of their parties. One of the things New Labour will be remembered for is their; broken promises, lies and spin and as I have said above this Government are no different.
This Government have been in power now for about eight months and they have broken a number of election promises. I am going to list some of their broken promises.
1. The Liberals promised not to raise tuition fees.
2. The Tories promised proposals to get rid of the Human Rights Act.
3.They promised to repatriate powers back from Europe.
4. Mr Cameron said 'We have no plans to raise VAT', it goes up on January 1. Also Nick Clegg promised his party would not raise VAT.
5. The Tories had no plans to increase capital gains tax, which has already risen for higher rate tax payers.
6. Mr Cameron promised that anyone carrying a knife would expect a prison sentence, he set that one aside just this week.
Prior to the election there was no mention they would deprive people of child benefits. There was no mention of reducing prisoner numbers. Chris Huhne promised that his party would oppose the building of any new nuclear power stations, once in power he has changed his tune.
I have heard many excuses from our leaders for reneging on promises, one of them has been that they did not know the state of our finances, but this one does not really wash, no one can really take that excuse seriously. The line taken by both sides is that within a coalition you have to compromise, well if this is what having a coalition Government is about I'll be honest I do not really want one. Surely the whole point of having a manifesto is to stick to your pledges, what makes me so angry with how politicians have behaved over recent years, is that they promise so much and then when they get into power they do not follow through with so many of their promises.
What is the point of a manifesto if you do not follow through with your pledges! Every time a promise is broken and a politician is pulled up about it, the same old excuses are brought out. The same is true for this lot, they have used the financial situation, even though anyone with half a brain knew the state of our countries finances. They use the excuse of having to compromise within a coalition, but how long are they going to keep using this excuse.
This government have been in power for eight months and have broken so many promises, how many more promises are they going to break before the next election. I wonder what their legacy will be, will we look back on this Government and remember them for what they did or what they said and didn't do?
I am a great believer in honesty and integrity, and I know there are some politicians out there who still believe in these virtues, but unfortunately there are many who do not. I believe in life we all have choices to make, I know sometimes we promise our children we will do something and then circumstances overtake us and we then are not able to go through with our promise. I know running a country isn't an easy thing and sometimes circumstances can overtake a Government which are beyond their control. But a lot of these promises were made and as soon as they got elected they chose to either ignore them or make excuses why they could not follow them through.
What I have realised is that people do not like being lied to, we can understand that circumstances change which are beyond the Governments control. But what people do not want is for politicians to promise one thing and then do another time after time. I wonder how long people will put up with it, or will people just get so used to lying politicians that they will no longer care and not bother voting, let's hope not.
This Government have been in power now for about eight months and they have broken a number of election promises. I am going to list some of their broken promises.
1. The Liberals promised not to raise tuition fees.
2. The Tories promised proposals to get rid of the Human Rights Act.
3.They promised to repatriate powers back from Europe.
4. Mr Cameron said 'We have no plans to raise VAT', it goes up on January 1. Also Nick Clegg promised his party would not raise VAT.
5. The Tories had no plans to increase capital gains tax, which has already risen for higher rate tax payers.
6. Mr Cameron promised that anyone carrying a knife would expect a prison sentence, he set that one aside just this week.
Prior to the election there was no mention they would deprive people of child benefits. There was no mention of reducing prisoner numbers. Chris Huhne promised that his party would oppose the building of any new nuclear power stations, once in power he has changed his tune.
I have heard many excuses from our leaders for reneging on promises, one of them has been that they did not know the state of our finances, but this one does not really wash, no one can really take that excuse seriously. The line taken by both sides is that within a coalition you have to compromise, well if this is what having a coalition Government is about I'll be honest I do not really want one. Surely the whole point of having a manifesto is to stick to your pledges, what makes me so angry with how politicians have behaved over recent years, is that they promise so much and then when they get into power they do not follow through with so many of their promises.
What is the point of a manifesto if you do not follow through with your pledges! Every time a promise is broken and a politician is pulled up about it, the same old excuses are brought out. The same is true for this lot, they have used the financial situation, even though anyone with half a brain knew the state of our countries finances. They use the excuse of having to compromise within a coalition, but how long are they going to keep using this excuse.
This government have been in power for eight months and have broken so many promises, how many more promises are they going to break before the next election. I wonder what their legacy will be, will we look back on this Government and remember them for what they did or what they said and didn't do?
I am a great believer in honesty and integrity, and I know there are some politicians out there who still believe in these virtues, but unfortunately there are many who do not. I believe in life we all have choices to make, I know sometimes we promise our children we will do something and then circumstances overtake us and we then are not able to go through with our promise. I know running a country isn't an easy thing and sometimes circumstances can overtake a Government which are beyond their control. But a lot of these promises were made and as soon as they got elected they chose to either ignore them or make excuses why they could not follow them through.
What I have realised is that people do not like being lied to, we can understand that circumstances change which are beyond the Governments control. But what people do not want is for politicians to promise one thing and then do another time after time. I wonder how long people will put up with it, or will people just get so used to lying politicians that they will no longer care and not bother voting, let's hope not.
Sunday, 5 December 2010
Global warming myths.
Here we go again, the British Meteorological Office has stated that 2010 is on course to be the warmest or second warmest year since current records began, even though Britain and many parts of Europe have experienced one of the coldest Novembers on record. Many would argue that that is only Europe, what about the rest of the world? Well if you take the whole world into consideration and look at the data, you will quickly find out that there has been no increase in Global temperatures in 15 years.
One of the things I have argued in my short time doing this blog, is that it is important to look at the facts. Many people argue their point using emotive language, they argue using subjective opinion and base what they believe on what they hear from the media and don't look into it for themselves.
Global warming is a good example of this, as I have said above the Met Office have stated that global warming is still happening, but if you spend a little time and research it for yourself you will very quickly find that the truth is somewhat different. I want to ask one question, how long do we have to see global temperatures not rise before the argument in favour of man-made global warming starts to collapse?
An interesting point about the global warming discussion is the recent photo publish by the warmists of a mother polar bear carrying its pup on its back. This was published by a global warming lobbyist group to suggest that this was more proof that global warming was happening. This of course has proved nothing, as this was taken in July 2006 by a Mrs Angela Plumb. Jon Aars, a Norwegian polar bear specialist has said that polar bears have been doing this for years. So what does this prove? As usual, absolutely nothing!
Micheal Mann, one of the warmists leading lights and the author of the infamous 'hockey stick graph'. This was the graph that Al Gore, in his film An Inconvenient Truth used to show that global temperatures stayed the same for about 2000 years and then suddenly rose in the latter part of the twentieth century. He has finally admitted there was a 'medieval warm period' around 1000 AD and the world was hotter than it is now.
Even Phil Jones, of the Climate Research Unit, and someone who has pushed forward the theory of global warming has admitted that there has been 'no statistical significant warming' since 1995.
I am fed up with propaganda, in whatever area that is, unfortunately spin and propaganda has been around for years and will probably never change. It is important that we find out and research things for ourselves and don't just believe what some so called expert says. It isn't really that difficult to find out things for yourself, especially with the internet. So I would urge anyone who is interested to spend a little time researching and you will quickly find that the reality can be totally different to what you hear in the media.
One of the things I have argued in my short time doing this blog, is that it is important to look at the facts. Many people argue their point using emotive language, they argue using subjective opinion and base what they believe on what they hear from the media and don't look into it for themselves.
Global warming is a good example of this, as I have said above the Met Office have stated that global warming is still happening, but if you spend a little time and research it for yourself you will very quickly find that the truth is somewhat different. I want to ask one question, how long do we have to see global temperatures not rise before the argument in favour of man-made global warming starts to collapse?
An interesting point about the global warming discussion is the recent photo publish by the warmists of a mother polar bear carrying its pup on its back. This was published by a global warming lobbyist group to suggest that this was more proof that global warming was happening. This of course has proved nothing, as this was taken in July 2006 by a Mrs Angela Plumb. Jon Aars, a Norwegian polar bear specialist has said that polar bears have been doing this for years. So what does this prove? As usual, absolutely nothing!
Micheal Mann, one of the warmists leading lights and the author of the infamous 'hockey stick graph'. This was the graph that Al Gore, in his film An Inconvenient Truth used to show that global temperatures stayed the same for about 2000 years and then suddenly rose in the latter part of the twentieth century. He has finally admitted there was a 'medieval warm period' around 1000 AD and the world was hotter than it is now.
Even Phil Jones, of the Climate Research Unit, and someone who has pushed forward the theory of global warming has admitted that there has been 'no statistical significant warming' since 1995.
I am fed up with propaganda, in whatever area that is, unfortunately spin and propaganda has been around for years and will probably never change. It is important that we find out and research things for ourselves and don't just believe what some so called expert says. It isn't really that difficult to find out things for yourself, especially with the internet. So I would urge anyone who is interested to spend a little time researching and you will quickly find that the reality can be totally different to what you hear in the media.
Friday, 3 December 2010
Corruption
I heard some very good news yesterday, England didn't win the right to host the World Cup. To be honest I am not surprised, FIFA is probably one of the most corrupt organisations on this planet. For years journalists have been trying to highlight the corruption within this organisation. FIFA behaves with total immunity and flies to many countries around the world and are accorded huge status by Prime Ministers, Presidents and other world leaders.
On Monday BBC's Panorama showed in full detail the activities of this odious organisation; it produced evidence of huge amounts of bribery. This programme also produced evidence that FIFA insist that countries change their laws, including one, governing Banks and Foreign Exchange Operations. FIFA had asked for 'the unrestricted import and export of all foreign currencies to and from the UK'. And the UK Government agreed to this, so if England had hosted the World Cup, FIFA executives were free to move around with sacks of unexplained cash and customs would not be allowed to ask any questions.
After Panorama's programme (The Times had also been investigating FIFA) on Monday, many people within England's bid team were critical of the BBC, including Government Ministers. David Beckham, David Cameron and, Prince William were quite happy to cosy up to the leaders of FIFA and even ignore what the BBC had said. Andy Anson, the leader of England's bid had spent the previous year railing against anyone who criticised football's governing body as unpatriotic. He is now railing against FIFA's executive committee and is calling them duplicitous.
That is the reason I am happy England lost the right to hold the World Cup. I feel that in some way those who have cosied up to the FIFA executives and ignored their behaviour to be as guilty as they are. People criticised the timing of the Panorama programme, but if they had shown it after Thursday nothing would have been said and this would have been just another BBC programme. The people who decided to show this programme when they did, did us all a favour; hopefully there might be some investigation into the behaviour of FIFA and the power it holds. I personally think that a separate organisation should be set up and all FIFA executives should stand trial.
England lost out to Russia, probably one of the most corrupt countries in the world, I think that sums up FIFA. The 2022 World Cup is to be held in Qatar, a country with a population of 1.7 million, an oil rich country whose day time temperatures in the summer can rise to over 50 degrees Celsius (even the best athlete in the world would struggle to run around for ninety minutes in that heat). Russia has a long history of racism and FIFA talks about stamping out racism, that of course didn't matter, the fans do not matter, money of course is the overriding drive behind this organisation of crooks.
England tried to sell their bid on the basis of the legacy it would leave, believe you me FIFA do not care. I shouldn't think there is one altruistic bone in any FIFA executives body, I don't suppose they would even know what the word means. What legacy did the South Africa World Cup bring, when 50 per cent of the population remain below the poverty line. Russia banned all exports of wheat for fear of famine this winter and is now going to spend millions on building nine new stadiums, what are the locals going to eat, concrete?
What I feel is the most disappointing thing in all of this is not that England lost out to hosting the World Cup. It is that the England delegation, including the Prime Minister and our Government danced to the tune of this putrid organisation. They have spent the last few months schmoozing, lobbying and bending over backwards to every demand of these hideous group of people. What I wonder would the British Government have done to achieve the hosting of the World Cup. I don't suppose selling their soul to the devil and agreeing to sacrifice everything they hold dear would have been to much. If these people had asked to sleep with every member of the English bid teams wives including; Kate Middleton, Victoria Beckham and Samantha Cameron would they have agreed to it? I wonder!
So while there are many who feel disappointed in losing out to Russia and Qatar, don't be too deflated. At least it has now been highlighted how corrupt this organisation is and we can be proud that our press has the freedom to report this sort of corruption unlike the press in Russia and Qatar. Let them have the World Cup, better to save your integrity than to sacrifice it on the alter of greed and corruption.
On Monday BBC's Panorama showed in full detail the activities of this odious organisation; it produced evidence of huge amounts of bribery. This programme also produced evidence that FIFA insist that countries change their laws, including one, governing Banks and Foreign Exchange Operations. FIFA had asked for 'the unrestricted import and export of all foreign currencies to and from the UK'. And the UK Government agreed to this, so if England had hosted the World Cup, FIFA executives were free to move around with sacks of unexplained cash and customs would not be allowed to ask any questions.
After Panorama's programme (The Times had also been investigating FIFA) on Monday, many people within England's bid team were critical of the BBC, including Government Ministers. David Beckham, David Cameron and, Prince William were quite happy to cosy up to the leaders of FIFA and even ignore what the BBC had said. Andy Anson, the leader of England's bid had spent the previous year railing against anyone who criticised football's governing body as unpatriotic. He is now railing against FIFA's executive committee and is calling them duplicitous.
That is the reason I am happy England lost the right to hold the World Cup. I feel that in some way those who have cosied up to the FIFA executives and ignored their behaviour to be as guilty as they are. People criticised the timing of the Panorama programme, but if they had shown it after Thursday nothing would have been said and this would have been just another BBC programme. The people who decided to show this programme when they did, did us all a favour; hopefully there might be some investigation into the behaviour of FIFA and the power it holds. I personally think that a separate organisation should be set up and all FIFA executives should stand trial.
England lost out to Russia, probably one of the most corrupt countries in the world, I think that sums up FIFA. The 2022 World Cup is to be held in Qatar, a country with a population of 1.7 million, an oil rich country whose day time temperatures in the summer can rise to over 50 degrees Celsius (even the best athlete in the world would struggle to run around for ninety minutes in that heat). Russia has a long history of racism and FIFA talks about stamping out racism, that of course didn't matter, the fans do not matter, money of course is the overriding drive behind this organisation of crooks.
England tried to sell their bid on the basis of the legacy it would leave, believe you me FIFA do not care. I shouldn't think there is one altruistic bone in any FIFA executives body, I don't suppose they would even know what the word means. What legacy did the South Africa World Cup bring, when 50 per cent of the population remain below the poverty line. Russia banned all exports of wheat for fear of famine this winter and is now going to spend millions on building nine new stadiums, what are the locals going to eat, concrete?
What I feel is the most disappointing thing in all of this is not that England lost out to hosting the World Cup. It is that the England delegation, including the Prime Minister and our Government danced to the tune of this putrid organisation. They have spent the last few months schmoozing, lobbying and bending over backwards to every demand of these hideous group of people. What I wonder would the British Government have done to achieve the hosting of the World Cup. I don't suppose selling their soul to the devil and agreeing to sacrifice everything they hold dear would have been to much. If these people had asked to sleep with every member of the English bid teams wives including; Kate Middleton, Victoria Beckham and Samantha Cameron would they have agreed to it? I wonder!
So while there are many who feel disappointed in losing out to Russia and Qatar, don't be too deflated. At least it has now been highlighted how corrupt this organisation is and we can be proud that our press has the freedom to report this sort of corruption unlike the press in Russia and Qatar. Let them have the World Cup, better to save your integrity than to sacrifice it on the alter of greed and corruption.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
