I think the decision to let her go was a mistake by Labour, maybe giving her a hard financial penalty would have worked and maybe selling her new flat in Brighton and moving back to her constituency would have been a smart move.
I think if she and Labour had tried they could have got through this, after all we all assume that the conservatives or reform politicians would cheat if they could. That may seem unfair but history has shown that they had their fair share of controversy.
She was such an important part of the Labour party, her background being quite different from most politicians gave Labour supporters the belief that she had a closer understanding to many of their own situations.
The Labour ship is now adrift at sea, with a broken mast drifting towards the jagged rocks of social media with their souls consumed by the conservative sirens and the Reform pirates waiting to pillage the wreckage.
Great shame really
Is free speech a good thing? short answer is YES and we should defend our right to speak freely in a peaceful respectful way. It is a fundamental part of a democracy which sadly currently seems to be in danger of political restrictions in some democratic countries
However we must remember that free speech by any person is based on many factors including their personal circumstances, degree of knowledge of the subject, influence of politics and the information provided by media which can be influenced by external players such as politicians and other influential parties.
Speaking freely does not mean you are correct in your views and therefore free speech is only of value if you have debate and are prepared to alter your position as you broaden your understanding of the subject.
Debate is where we often have problems on the internet and especially social media. I see it like road rage in cars, you often see people shouting and swearing from inside the safety of their car whereas they would not say anything if face to face to someone and indeed on the internet people can be very abusive from the safety of their device which makes debate quite toxic.
I am not particularly religious but I do have principles equivalent if you like to the 10 commandments and one of those is that I will always give others the same respect that I would expect them to give to me and I believe that internet based debate will always fail if people do not follow a similar principle.
The political parties and politicians use social media and manipulate it to support their own agendas and Internet companies are only interested in 'hits' and the more toxic the debate then the more 'hits' this seems to generate so there is little hope of true free speech actually achieving anything via the internet.
So whereas the internet is great for researching information and observing current events etc. I do not think it is a place for debate unless you can do so with respect
When I was younger I believed that the opposition parties role in politics was to hold the government to account for the policies they make and suggest changes that they believe are necessary in line with their parties strategy.
Of course they want to demonstrate that they are a better option to be the next government and this could get quite intense as approaching elections.
Nowadays as I see it from the get go the opposition parties have only one objective and that is to discredit the government, to manufacture strategies and policies in direct opposition to those of the government that they would never have any hope to implement.
This form of government no longer works, we end up with a government that is forced to make poor decisions and shooting from the hip policies based on the pressure that the opposition have created through social media influencing the public. Basically setting the government up to fail and then we do it all again with the next government whoever they are.
I don't know what the answer is, we just need the parties to clean themselves up and start contributing to the success of the country whether they are in power or not, with the mostly untrustworthy politicians we have this is unlikely.
Politicians by nature have to hide facts from the public otherwise they would never get anything done, the difference now is that we no longer trust politicians to do the right thing unlike previous times where there was some belief that they were doing the right thing for the county. This may have been naive and maybe not true but at least it allowed the government to function.
I know its not a simple problem and I may have some of this wrong but I am convinced the way UK politics is at the moment it is not working.
Illegal immigration is currently the hottest topic in British politics, not necessarily because it is a more important issue than Gaza, Ukraine, the Cost of Living crisis, the crisis in the NHS or even pot holes although it may be for some and it certainly is a problem closer to our lives.
Those wannabe political parties that chase the popular vote see it as an opportunity to attract those easy votes by fueling the media with criticism and rash promises which they absolutely cannot keep. Even the Prime Minister has spent more of his communication on immigration than any other topic as he tries to chase the popular vote.
Don't get me wrong this is a problem that needs solving, but it clearly is a very complex problem to resolve and so far none of our politicians and governments have been able to.
But what sort of problems are there to be resolved? Well there certainly is a problem where people die crossing the channel so we need to stop the boats, it certainly is a problem if we deport true refuges and send them back to the regime that they have escaped from so we need to grant them refuge status and its a problem if any of the migrants commit criminal activities here and we need to ensure that we verify and monitor anyone coming to this country who has an unknown past. It is also a problem if you are an existing citizen living in a deprived area and it seems that immigrants are being better served than you are, this of course is not the immigrants fault it is the governments fault, no one in this country should live in a deprived area struggling to survive when there are other more privileged people who have so much.
Stopping the boats needs coordination across Europe as well as in the countries that these people are coming from, this is unlikely to happen as none of the other parties are interested in helping other countries. I think we can reduce the numbers but we will never stop all of them and so we have to ensure they do not use illegal trafficking services back in their countries of origin, we can only do that by ensuring the message is that if you enter illegally you will be sent back, but at the same time we must strengthen routes for true refuges to allow them to escape persecution.
Different cultures have different ways of behaving and different beliefs that we do not always accept in our own culture and that is why we have our laws based on our beliefs and anyone coming here has to agree to honor those laws. We need to step up our execution of those laws and catch and prosecute those who disobey the laws, whether they are rogue landlords keeping people in poverty, grooming gangs, people using illegal migrants as cheap labour, people traffickers, or illegal immigrants breaking the law etc. The law needs to act hard and swiftly to protect all decent people no matter where they are from.
So why do the Politicians in opposition paint such a bad picture, obviously its because they want us to vote for them at the next election and they will do everything they can to make the current government look bad. So why do we listen to these politicians, well firstly people have become very angry and by this I do not mean the hooligan knuckle dragging on the floor people but ordinary folks like you and me who are angry. We may be angry with the cost of living, angry with crap jobs, angry we cannot buy a house, angry with transport costs, angry that it rained on our holiday, being unhappy with our body, not having a partner anymore, basically we just have a lot of angry people in this world and they need to take it out on others and illegal immigrants are an ideal target particularly when politicians and the far right poke the fire.
It is a fact that Immigration legal and illegal will continue to increase in the coming years no matter what we do. It will increase due to conflicts, economic migration seeking a better life, climate related drought and famine, disease epidemics etc. people will migrate and the vast majority will migrate legally here, doctors, nurses, dentists, IT people will all migrate here where there are specific skill shortages which the government should but seem to be failing to address in the long term. The illegal immigrants will make very little different to housing and jobs which to be honest are the lowest paid jobs that no one here really wants to do etc. but the legal immigrants definitely do as there numbers are vastly more than the illegal ones.
So what can be done to address the issues of illegal migration. Well to be honest not a lot, maybe if there was less conflict in the world, maybe if there were less people in the world, maybe if the planet stopped warming so much then things would be OK and people would maybe be less likely to migrate but this will not happen so we have to accept the world is changing and that our lives will change.
This may lead to increasing numbers of illegal immigrants, some people think they are taking our jobs, living on benefits etc. (this is mainly legal immigrants). The only effective way of resolving these issues is to put maximum effort to process them quickly and providing they are not refuges and providing they can be returned without danger to themselves then they should be returned to their country of origin and those that need to stay here should be allowed to do so. It used to take just 5 weeks to process an asylum seeker, now it takes 3 years, this has to change, if we process these applications more quickly then the hotels and HMO residents will reduce numbers naturally with fewer people waiting, people will be returned more frequently sending the message back to their countries of origin that you will not get in illegally.
We need to tell ourselves not to be so angry, we really cannot be happy when we are angry at everything, things are as they are and only if we work to resolve them will they get better. Take it for granted that politicians are only interested in remaining in power and take everything they say with caution but use your vote wisely for a better world for all of humanity.
Fighting for your country
Today in the newspaper there was a report saying that two out of three UK people would not be prepared to fight for the United Kingdom. This was in some way surprising but if you look at it maybe not.
Firstly we should understand there is a difference between defending your country and fighting for it. I would believe that the majority of people would be prepared to defend their country if it was attacked and their families and loved ones were at threat as we see in Europe currently and I believe we all support Ukraine in this.
However fighting for your country outside of your own country is another matter, the world is now different in so many ways, we no longer trust our leaders, politicians, monarchy, business leaders who have all been shown in some ways to be untrustworthy, not all but generally we do not trust them and we would have doubts about fighting in other countries for political reasons that to us make no sense.
Recent wars have not been seen as worthwhile and many of peoples loved ones have been destroyed either physically or mentally, heroes to us but difficult to understand for some why they were there and so it is understandable why people question whether they would want to repeat this, its not about bravery or fear its about belief in these actions.
Politically the world is increasingly being led by authoritarian leaders meaning even our allies are seen as not really true allies as they are only looking after their own interests and not who we would want to fight for or with.
Also the war machine is changing, the use of social media influencing, spy in the sky satellites, drones etc. means that computers and machines are doing a lot of what troops would normally do, so some would see that being in a battlefield is not necessary in the future and technology will continue to make fighting a more machine based activity.
If the UK government wants people to be more supportive of fighting for the country then the leaders have to first convince the people that they can be trusted, a big ask in modern politics.
It has been some time since I have posted anything in any of my blogs. No real reason why, yes I have been busy but not that busy that I could not find a little time.
But what I had decided to do was to concentrate in my workbench system which I had started to develop some time ago as a project to develop a window library for browsers. I have now developed it to be reasonably stable and to have a number of apps including the one that I am writing this with. It also has quite a nice https file system and a JSON based database which makes all of this easier.
Therefore I hope to write more things in the future.
As you will have seen in my other posts, I try to give respect to the USA's administration as it was elected fairly, I don't agree with their administration from an international perspective but I still respect it and we just have to play the cards we are dealt.
However in recent days we have seen a breakdown in relations with Europe and in particular Ukraine, it is not easy to understand the strategy here but it does seem very dangerous. There has been much anger here but as I have said before this does not help and indeed it is not possible to act appropriately if you are shouting in anger.
Having thought about this it seems to me that apart from money, why does the US need to be involved in the peace process, I am sure they don't want to be as they have other issues. I believe that Europe including Ukraine of course should be negotiating directly with Russia to obtain a lasting peace where Europeans and Russians can live on the same continent without fear or threat.
Europe should negotiate the US's exit from Europe while Europe works towards a sustainable peace.
I do not know how Ukraine feels about this as they have lost so much in this war and so whatever happens they must be part of the solution from the very start.
There has been a huge change in how the world works since the US elections. We can dislike, disagree, be angry or even approve but it makes no difference, we are where we are and we have to work with that.
At least the world has now had a wake up call, I grew up in a world where ever since world war 2 most countries in the West had some level of a trust alliance, this has now gone completely and I am sure if you ask most people in the west you will find that there is no more trust in America than there is for China or Russia, these countries are largely centered on their own self interests and will change relationships with other countries at a whim if it suits them to do so and they have the right to do this and we have to accept this. I cannot foretell the consequences of the breakdown in trust and relationships between countries but it will not be good.
America has changed so many things so quickly that the rest of the world cannot keep up, it has threatened countries that it will effectively punish them unless they fall in line with what is best for America.
A lot of their changes they have justified as stopping corruption removing inefficiency etc. but what they must realize is that in the case of foreign aid there is corruption in the target countries and there always has been but at least aid was getting through and fewer people perished, now nothing will get through and more people will perish, we should fix the problem not run away from it.
War is a terrible thing, whether in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan etc. and focus should be on solving these conflicts without self interests of countries providing conditional support rather than doing what will stop the evil consequences of war.
America is correct that it should not be the dominant member in NATO, UN etc. no one country should, we need to level the playing field across these organisations which will mean the rest of the world does have to step up and I think that is now accepted in the West but it will take time and for America to just stop makes the situation almost impossible to resolve.
There is a huge drive in the implementation of Artificial Intelligence in the workplace, it is early days yet and we all have had bad experiences talking to Bots but AI will improve and without doubt those people in unskilled jobs where they are providing customer service solutions such as receiving a call from a customer, getting information on their account and following the companies procedure on resolving their query will be at risk, at the higher job end where the skill is making a quick decision on a transaction then AI will make those decisions quicker and interpret the results faster putting those jobs at risk, jobs such as accountants filing tax returns where there is a clear process to follow then these will also be at risk.
Then if we add robotics in manufacturing and warehousing as well as driver less cars, buses, lorries, trains etc. the future of employment has to change.
The government says that AI will enhance the employees job and make it more rewarding, this is simply not true, there are no replacement jobs for unskilled workers and many skilled employees will not have transferable skills and we cannot resource such huge retraining for jobs that do not exist anyway!
It is in the interest of any organisation to minimize staff costs and they will not continue to employ people when they do not need them.
So in the future we will have much larger numbers of people who do not have a conventional job and we really need to accept this and plan on what to do with different income streams, different ways to approach citizen benefits such as Universal Basic Income.
If we plan for this now then the transition in the future will be much smoother, if we do not then there will be industrial disputes, more people in poverty and an economic global disaster.
At the end of 2024 America voted in a new government as is their right and despite how some of us in other countries may feel about that we have to respect their elected government as we would expect them to respect our elected government.
At the same time I have to lay my cards on the table and say that their new president would not be my choice and I do find listening to him and seeing his recent actions make me feel that he has little regard for the rest of the world from both an economic and humanitarian perspective but again that is his belief and he was democratically elected with those beliefs.
There have been many angry statements from around the world in regards to the actions that the new American government has taken. However I personally do not think that being angry helps and rather than being angry I feel we should accept that they have the right to their beliefs but we also have the right to disagree with them and to show through our own actions what is the right way to be.
The world economy is not great at the moment with most of the western world feeling the impact of price rises and inflation. People are scared that the measures that America is taking could lead to a trade war of some form, my country the UK has a reasonably balanced trade with America and will definitely not want to rock the boat by causing friction between our two countries.
All countries will have a me first approach to government, it's just whether they care about who is second that is the concern.
In a family the children often disagree with their parents and siblings and can do so quite aggressively, but ultimately they will still want to play with their siblings and have their fish fingers and baked beans for tea so ultimately the parents and siblings have some form of power which may give them the upper hand. As we get older we may completely rebel against this but we know that will only end badly maybe even with our own parents and siblings rejecting us.
No doubt what America is doing now is upsetting the world family and maybe some will rebel and maybe some will just do as they are told but some will do what they believe is right without fear or confrontation.
People have always pushed back against the idea of 'Big Brother' watching which generally is thought of as the 'State' watching what we do and generally I agree with many of the issues with this as my personal freedom is important to me.
People in the west will quote the situation in non western countries where the wests view is that these states control and monitor their people closely.
This may be true but is it always bad? Clearly if the state is misleading people or intimidating people or at its worse forcing people into conforming to what it wants them to do then that is bad.
As an example we see oppressive controls on women and free speech in some countries and we must continue to condemn these restrictions.
However is it possible to use technology to ensure that we are all safe, whether in our homes, out in the street or driving our cars?
In the UK our Police Force has been under resourced for many years now and so they tend to ignore petty crime such as bicycle theft or burglary as they leave it to the insurance companies to repay the victims. It is not the Police's fault its just they don't have the resources funded by the government.
But these crimes are important to people and particularly the elderly and people living on their own who will be very scared if other houses have been broken into close by.
Technology could prevent a lot of these crimes, street cams on every street in the UK with a central control room and use of AI video recognition software to spot suspicious behavior would help make neighbourhoods safe. These cams are already on our high street, at work, in cars, doorbells and even on cycle helmets so they are part of our daily lives.
My point here is that this it is not about personal freedom its about protecting people in our society. We are currently going through a spate of car break ins in our area and due to the vast number of 'ring doorbells' in the area we have captured several videos of the criminal involved, if similar cams were under a central control then the police could most likely have caught the offender.
I believe that technology can fill the gap in protecting people where the Police no longer can for petty crime and that the argument for human rights which definitely always needs to be considered and addressed could be satisfied if we wanted to.
This post is about the conflicts that we see around the world currently, they are clearly not black and white, maybe one side is right and the other is wrong, maybe they are both right or both wrong or more likely both sides are partly right and partly wrong.
In any case the tragedy to innocent people is devastating in many cases sickening and totally unacceptable questioning the character of those responsible on both sides.
In conflicts even though out of compassion and decency we wish for them to end peacefully, generally we end up taking sides, particularly governments who will have reasons why they would support one side against the other either politically or economically.
As an individual I try to see all points of view in a conflict, see the history about how it came about, I try to ignore economic concerns, I try not to feel vengeful for atrocities that happen which is very difficult but look for justice and protection for those who are victims and try to look at reconciliation for both parties.
If you are directly involved in a conflict it is impossible to see things other than in black and white, but for those who can influence the conflict it is important to see all aspects. As an example as parents with our children we often have to solve disputes between siblings because we know they cannot do it themselves, we try not to take sides and we accept that we may have to sacrifice something to appease the situation.
Governments will not change they will always put their own interests first but we as individuals have the power to influence our politicians to focus on peace above all other considerations.
Maybe this post is pointless as people and governments will not change, but maybe if we accept that not everything is black and white then that's a start.
As of today there is a new president of without question the most powerful country on earth whose influence on the rest of the world whether through the dollar or through military might is unquestionable.
This position needs a very strong and focused administration to fill it and despite how you feel about the outcome it is clear that for the majority of the world outside of the US then the democrats were the best outcome but for the benefit to the US internally then you could argue that the republicans were the best choice.
Now as we watched it it was said to be too close an election to call and yet it turned out to be huge victory for the republicans why were the poles so wrong?
Well in my opinion it comes down to human nature, people talk a good conscience but in fact inside their self interests outweigh any conscience they may have and that's why people probably said they were unhappy with the republican option but their self interest made them vote republican.
This is just human nature and is our very basic survival instincts kicking in!
If we did let our conscience rule our decisions as indeed maybe we should then we would not sell arms to anyone, we would not avoid paying tax, we would not have affairs, we would not cheat in exams or sports. But we do and again this is out of self interest.
Are we all the same? mostly!
Can we change? rarely!
But we can try, if more of us follow our conscience then maybe that could become an alternative survival instinct. If we all stop selling arms then there are no arms to kill us. If we all pay our tax then there are public services fully funded, if we stop having affairs then we have no broken families. If we stop cheating we are being honest to ourselves and not being something we are not!
Last night we sat outside with a glass of wine and cheese and biscuits, overlooking one of Britain's most beautiful beaches.
We had the whole beach to ourselves and sat there listening to the ocean breath as the waves crashed in and then retreated rhythmically, we were fully immersed in this natural wonder, we were at peace!
It made me realise as if I had not already what a beautiful place this world is and to question WTF are we doing hell bent on destroying it and why could not everyone in the world enjoy this same peace, surely they deserve this as much as me?
If as a grandparent I could get a Jewish grandparent, a Palestinian grandparent, a Ukrainian grandparent and a Russian grandparent all around this table in this beautiful place I am pretty sure we would all want the same thing, a safe and happy world for our children and grandchildren to grow up in.
We would not want kidnapping, bombing and killing of largely innocent people, we would not want to repeat past mistakes, we would not want vengeance for crimes of the past that just perpetuates hatred, we would indeed seek justice but again in a way that is not a tit for tat solution.
In our three score years and ten we will have seen many good and bad things, we may have experienced devastating acts against ourselves or our loved ones and we may have had anger and hatred in our lives but hopefully we will have over all these years become wise in our lives and look differently on the past.
We would want to work though discussion and understanding to move away from the hatred created by past actions and move forward with finding common ground, only requiring what we need to be safe and not being greedy or selfish wanting more than we really need.
Maybe our governments should instead of listening to corporations, billionaires, dictatorial leaders and their own egos, they should instead listen to their grandparents.
Grandparents for Peace
Listening to the debate about pensioners winter fuel payment and the fact it is now being paid only to those on pension credits. We see protests from many organisations who quite rightly want to protect those who may suffer that this will hit pensioners who's cost of living due to many factors, inflation, income, poor home insulation, health etc. who do not claim pension benefit and who will suffer because of this cut.
Thanks to the triple lock we have seen appropriate state pension rises but as we know living on just the state pension alone is very difficult and speaking from experience the little savings I have have not kept up with inflation.
However I believe that if we could accurately identify those who are likely to struggle in this country we could make decisions on who should receive help much more fairly and not solely rely on those who have submitted claims.
The government knows who lives here, how old they are, where they live, knows what car they drive, knows if they have gone on a foreign holiday, knows their health situation. Surely in this modern age we could have algorithms that could take all the information about people and accurately work out their state. Google, Facebook do this for marketing purposes why cant we do it for humanitarian purposes.
If you look at who has had a foreign holiday, who has a posh car less than 10 years old, then this would be a fair indication that they can be ruled out of the poverty band.
Ideally we could see those who shop at Waitrose, who eat out or have takeaways regularly, this would again show people who are not on the poverty line. This may be a step too far even though commercial companies are already doing this and getting past GDPR issues as legitimate use for marketing based on their interests, all those boxes you just tick!
So this would rule out those who should not receive these benefits and then allow the government to look at those that are left.
If we look at the opposite scale, those who pay no income tax, drive a very old car, shop very frugally, do not eat out or have takeaways etc. live in poorly insulated housing then we could narrow down on those that most likely need help.
The algorithms to do this would be easy to develop, the data exists and is accessible if we deemed it was right to do so with appropriate protections.
Additionally we could also identify those in other areas of poverty, child poverty, single parent families etc.
We have Think Tanks and Working Parties on all manner of things and I would like to see a government create one on finding a better way for identifying those on poverty.
There would and should be many objections to some of the ideas above, Big Brother etc. but we know that the Social Media companies are already pushing these areas. Business may fear that some people may switch their habits to avoid detection i.e. keep their old car, stop shopping at Waitrose, eat less takeaways etc. but this would be relatively few and would it matter? I think the impact on trade would be minimal, the impact on those that really need help could be huge.
Although this post is about AI and maybe I should have put it under my Computing posts I felt this is really about my thoughts on the AI industry and its effect on us rather than the technology.
I will put my hand up and say that I am a fan of AI, however if I was a football fan I would be the first to say that some teams are pretty awful and I feel its the same with AI, most of the implementations are pretty dreadful.
You would have to have been in a cave three miles under the surface of Mars not to have heard about the impact of AI on us and how every thing we see and do now has some AI aspect to it.
Why is this? Is it for the good of mankind to create a better world for all of us as we are led to believe?
Well maybe, and there certainly are some really good people out there trying to do this, but we have to accept that the boom in AI has largely been for economic reasons.
A lot of these benefits are about removing the human element from work, obviously humans are at least in the developed world quite expensive, they are unreliable (sickness) and they talk back (unions), AI and AI based machines remove these issues.
In my 50 years of computing experience before we had AI we obviously did analysys on data to determine trends and predict outcomes etc. to make better decisions, the tools were comparitively basic and more importantly the computing resources were much more limited. Now we have great tools and we have enormouse computing resources.
It truth if you think about it it is in the interests of most industries to remove the human element from their process and that is why they are pushing AI so much. Governments and CEO's will state that this will not replace jobs but will just enhance the work people do. I do not believe this to be true in all cases. If I have a warehouse from which I supply Teddy Bears, if I can pick, pack and ship all of my products using machines then I will do that simply because the costs are reduced, workforce problems reduced and more profit for me and my shareholders. I cannot see how I can give my employees a more enriched employment when I no longer need them.
Obviously there will be many jobs enhanced, Doctors and Surgeons will have much more capability to do there job better and in fact the whole health and care industry should be enhanced, whether it be an AI monitoring your health or telling you when to take your drugs, keeping you company from a mental health perspective etc., Investors will be able to trade and do deals much more effectively but many jobs will just dissapear and it will not be possible to take all of the unskilled labour force and retrain them.
Train drivers, Lorry drivers, Taxi Drivers will all be replaced with automated transport systems. This will happen with absolute certainty and the governments need to plan for this to happen in the not to distant future with acceptance of such things as 'Universal Basic Income' along with more stringent population control as we can only support a smaller workforce population. They need to do this now and not wait until the problems of unemployment, poverty and even starvation hit the worlds population which I am sure will also be able to fit a war or two in there somewhere as unrest occurs.
AI is inevitable and I truly believe it can bring some significant benefits to the world but it will have some significant economic effects and they need to be recognised and addressed now.
No one knows how far AI will go as it will find solutions to problems we did not know we had and provide services that we did not know that we needed in the same way as the Mobile phone has become something we never imagined.
AI should be embraced but governments should not stick their heads in the sand and should recognize the problems that will occur and address them before they become overwhelming. Denying these inevitable problems will just make matters worse whereas addressing them may well bring that better world we aspire to.
This week I have heard that it is the warmest week of the planet in history. This indicates that we are definitely not doing enough to stop global warming or maybe we are really trying but maybe its too late! At any rate things look bad.
A different measurement that may indicate how the world is going and how we may have to adapt to live differently in different parts of the world is the migration of species due to global warming.
In previous years non native species generally arrived in countries due to human intervention and in fact almost half of the plant species in the UK are non native now due to the importing of plants from all over the world. Similarly in the animal world we have signal crayfish, red squirrels etc. that were brought here by humans.
Now we are starting to find that non native species are being driven to other parts of the world due to climate change including Great White Sharks moving north possibly looking for food that has itself migrated further north.
There are also of course species that travel the world every year to enjoy appropriate weather conditions, i.e. Swallows, Orca's, Moths etc. How will this change as the world warms up, will they stay in locations longer or maybe not migrate at all any more?
Life can be like a book or for those of the Netflix generation it can be like a TV series. Its full of different chapters or episodes following on from one to another.
Each chapter ends with either a mystery, a calamity or some cataclysmic change, maybe sometimes a happy halcyon state whichever the case it drives us to go straight into the next chapter, to see where we go from there.
We can accept our life like this, when something defining happens, you loose your job, you become ill, you break up a relationship, you start a new relationship then mark that as the end of that chapter and open a new chapter and go on from there.
As someone who loves my country and all its diversity of people and culture I have to say how dissapointed I am in the latest Royal Family fiasco.
I am not a great fan of the royal family, but many people are and thats absolutely fine, I wish them absolutely no harm, I do wish we could redirect some of their incredible wealth to the people in need in this country, towards food banks, social housing, more hospitals etc. but there are many wealthy people in this country who could do more.
I also largely ignore what you see wealthy people do, we have seen a lot of show in the past from many celebrities clearly designed to make them popular.
The problem with the Royals is that they have accepted a responsibilty to care about the people of this country and to lead by example and as such have to be seen to live up to that responsibilty, which may seem unfair to them but its how it is.
But lets ignore all that as my synicism, what nobody can deny that the latest scandal from Harry has futher embarassed this country and its not needed. If he has some evidence that the royal family is acting in their own interests and not the countries then he should focus on that, not on the family squables which frankly are doing nobody any good other than the American Netflix and CBS channels.
I just wish they would all just shut up and leave the reality stuff to the profesionals on 'Love Island'
Additionaly we dont really know if there is some other agenda here, there maybe still some Diana issues, there may be some family issues across europe, remember after the death of Victoria we became part of the House of Hanover and later part of the House of Saxe-Coburg and only renamed as the House of Windsor durring the first World War to detach itself from what was happening in Europe, it did not stop their family relationships though that still exist today. Maybe theres some sinister plot going on? Now that would make a good Netflix story!
The news currently is very much about the cost of living crisis that so many unfortunate people are facing in this country and without doubt its shameful with over 2 million people using food banks, with over 11 million people in relative poverty of which over 3 million are children. 100 thousand homeless etc.
The government has taken measures to try to help but it is clear that many have slipped through the net when you see reports about families choosing between heating and food, People who are ill not being able to afford to power the medical equipment in their home.
We currently see loads of industrial action where people are trying to get their pay adjusted in line with inflation, there are other reasons why people are striking but pay seems to dominate most of the discussions.
We seem to be heading to a perfect storm, where some people are getting inflation plus pay rises, there employers having to pass on those costs, raising their prices, this raises inflation which then further inflames the cost of living crisis. Add into this all of the other external issues of fuel and raw material costs going up then we are in a real bad situation.
It would help to understand the split between those who are in a cost of living crisis and those who are in a cost of lifestyle issue because I suspect many people in the private sector who have had good pay rises are only feeling some impact to there standard of living, people still seem to be able to spend, we are hearing that holiday companies are getting record bookings, the pubs and restaurants around where I live are full so it is clear that not everyone is suffering in this crisis.
In this country there are people who have and there are those that have not. This crisis to me is just extending the gap between the haves and have nots, I am not sure the statistics of how many fall into either camp but I suspect there are lots of people becoming have nots through this crisis.
We all fully understand why people want to earn more money and have a better life, that's just normal, we want the best for our families, but we should all accept the fact that there are some people who are not so lucky and may not have the opportunity to improve their lives, people who say its a land of opportunity and everyone has a chance are very naive and usually they are the ones that have been lucky but in truth if you look at the numbers then it is clear that's not how it works for everyone.
We know many of our public service workers are struggling, not all of them, I am sure many Consultants in the NHS are not feeling the pinch and would never say they were but that many of the nurses are really struggling and we need to recognize this in any pay awards
Those that are doing well may feel that they are covered by having private insurance but that's no good if they have a car accident and require the fire service to get them out, an ambulance to get them to A&E and the medical staff to attend to your injuries. So no matter where you are coming from you would be crazy not to realize that we need to keep these services running well.
So for those people who are successful either by working hard or having a valued skill We have to accept that we are going to have to raise taxes on those that are higher earners to pay for our services. We cannot continue with a low tax economy at the expense of the less well off.
Just how well off do you need to be? if you were a billionaire, can you live that much better a life than a millionaire? Is there a point where being rich is being greedy? I don't know, I do know that most people would not turn down a lottery win.
That's the role of government to balance the economy so that all of its citizens have an acceptable life. I guess that's easier said than done.
We also cannot just make sudden changes to the economy as we already see the impact on the hospitality industry if people stop going out so we need a plan that will ensure we have a balanced economy for our future.
We have to accept that this is our country, we all have a responsibility to ensure that it functions for everyone and we know there are some good people, some bad people, some hard workers some lazy workers, some smart people some stupid people, but they all make up our country and its important that the smart people educate the stupid people, the hard workers encourage the lazy ones. The good people grow and the bad people recede
Consumerism is obviously part of it I do see that demand for items that are scarce makes them more expensive (oil and gas for example) so maybe if we all consumed less and reduced demand that would help. Do we really need the latest phone, wouldn't it be great if particularly the younger generations, kept there phones longer, kept there old cars longer or got rid of them and walked or rode a bike, wore clothes until they wore out rather than became unfashionable, went on memorable working holidays rather than baste themselves on a beach that they will forget within a few months.
In fact it does not matter what I do as I am old, but wouldn't it be great if the young people took the initiative to reject consumerism and start a new way of being responsible for their country and their world.
No I don't mean me,the only thing I should be nominated for is Idiot of the year.
I am referring to a number of comments that Kevin Sinfield should absolutely have been given a knighthood in the new years honours list.
I completely agree that he should be knighted and the Mirror mentioned a petition which I searched for but the only one I found was a parliament one that was rejected.
I am not surprised that he was not honored as it takes between 6 and 18 months for the Cabinet Office Honours committee to verify and either approve or reject the nomination. Also I have heard that there is an unwritten rule that there has to be 5 years gap between receiving an existing honour and a new one although I have searched for this and cannot find any evidence that this is true.
You can search the web to see what an incredible guy Kevin is showing a personality that displays everything that we should all aspire to, showing such friendship and love for his best mate as well as selflessly applying himself to raise awareness for the horrible disease that MND is. A true hero by anyones standards.
I do hope that he does get the honour he truly deserves soon, although I am sure he is not really bothered and that its those of us who admire him that want him to be honoured.