Something to watch and think about ???

One of many excellent links......

It's the first of 10 short clips. Well animated and voiced by Clive Anderson

Hum ?

So, I was listening to the radio while working (driving) the other day. They were focusing on the priministers' speech and comments about the forth coming public sector strike action, which is due next wednesday.

It happens that they were mainly spot lighting possible consequences of the participation of members of the Immigration and Borders agency staff at the various major airports.

Now Mr Cameron, the current (conservative) priminster was on about how few, percentage-wise, members of the various unions had actually voted for strike action, to try and prevent serious effects on the public service unions pensions etc, how the current government proposals would mean that they end up contributing a higher amount of their wages, end up working for longer, with a lower amount of pension at the end of their service.

Cameron was complaining. No surprise there. Except, a couple of months ago, we had a referendum, about whether it was time to change the current method of how elections are decided. The "Yes" campaign wanted to change to the "alternative vote" method, whereas the "No" campaign (of which, Cameron was part) wanted to leave it as it is i.e. "first past the post", like a horse race.

Now there's a problem with this. First, one of the No campaign points was that it's too complicated for us "mere mortals" to understand. But if that's the case, how is it that an ordinary bloke like me, understands that that is how the leaders of the various political parties are elected, yet I'm too thick to understand.

Second, if he doesn't like it (the "alternative vote for national elections"), then why is he complaining about the unions and industrial action being decided by "first past the post" results ?

Like anything Mr Cameron, you "can't have your cake, and eat it". It's one or the other. Either put up with the result by the current method, or let us change it to something that is fairer and more representative.

After all, I doubt whether we'll get "proportional representation" in my time, even though this is, by far, the fairest method to decide who represents us. But all the time that those in power, insist that we don't vote for a party, we vote for an individual name, then it's unlikely to happen.

Myself ? I consider myself "old Labour". Not because I necessarily agree with all the policies, but because they always seem to offer the fairest deal to the greatest number of people (usually the working classes). Yet I dislike the attachment of the "vocal, woolly headed, educated liberal do-gooder" types, that have got on the band wagon, probably for similar reasons. After all, it's at suggestions of theirs, that have removed so much power/authority from the Police, courts, the family, etc. Which has resulted in a large number of feckless teenagers, who have little or no respect for society. Yes, the parents have some blame in this as well.

Yet "they" won't criticise parents, as it would lose them voters - and given that the current government is a coalition (with the indecisive, power hungry, hedge sitting LibDems), that might change things to them being open to a "no confidence" vote that could remove the tories from power, so they won't do that will they.

Plus, if the kids know that the authorities have little power to "draw a line" that shouldn't be crossed then there's little reason for them to change and "toe the line". They can just continue to be a pain in the arse, as would currently appear to be the case.

But I digress.........

So Mr Cameron, you either have to put up with the self inflicted "first past the post" and work out how to deal with industrial action, or you have to allow us to have a more representative voting system, where you might not get quite as many seats in parliament at the moment, and yes, it would also give a small voice to the more "lunatic fringe" parties, but it would be fairer.

After all, we like to think that Britain is all about "fair play" don't we......

Unless it doesn't do what the politicians want, of course.......

It's "children in need" again tomorrow.....

So, tomorrow, the BBC will be doing it's utmost to dig into our pockets in the name of charity.

With other concurrent events, like "Evans" auction for thing that money can't buy (Wogan used to do that, but since he left the brekkie show, Evans has taken over).

Now none of us really mind donating to charity. There are at least some, properly worthy causes out there, both home and abroad.

Me ? I'll just keep donating to my own favourite charity i.e. the me appreciation society.......

More "ordinary" cynicism !

So the "poison dwarf" (George Osbourne MP, current chancellor of the exchequer) has sold off the nationalised "Northern Rock" to Virgin, albeit at a loss.

It's claimed that the loss is the best possible "value" to the tax paying public.

Couldn't possibly be more Tory shite could it ? Lets face it, a previous Tory government, led by the wicked witch (fucking Thatcher, the hectoring bitch), sold off pretty much all of the other "family silver" to buy votes with tax reduction didn't she/they.

No one on earth will convince me, that the current state of our "public utilites", wasn't already predicted by some smart arsed, right wing, "think tank". I honestly believe that despite all the bollocks that was spoken at the time "it will create competition, etc etc", they knew that in the relatively short space of time, that it would be their mates who'd own the shares, so that the only people who'd benefit would be the corporate element (senior management) and the shareholders.

I mean, it couldn't possibly be that they're all run in a cartel/mafia type way colluding to fix prices as much as they dare to rip the public off. They wouldn't dare, would they ?

Now the little fucker is trying a similar thing again, except he's got less "family silver" too sell hasn't he. So he'll sell off what he can, telling us that it's in our own benefit, not giving a monkies fuck about the working majority. He doesn't have to does he. Like most of the bastards in the highest levels of government, he's minted so it doesn't matter to him does it, as long as he can spin it to "our benefit"

Fuck off, lying twat! It's just yet another way of getting "national" money into your "PLU mates" pockets, all for our own benefit.

TV and Film Discrimination ?

I've come to the conclusion that the TV and Film industry management are discriminatory.

Well, if you watch any amount of TV or Fims/Movies, they go to great pains to make the actors and other who spend their time in front of camera look different.

Now I'm not thinking of making black or asian people look white or even hiding poor complexions with makeup and the like. No I'm alluding to the fact that the casting people seem to always go for the "vertically challenged" i.e. short arses.

Not always of course, but it does seem that unless its completely necessary, they stay away from "normal" or god forbid, tall people!

I mean, surely not all tall actors aren't wooden, like Arnie or Dolph ? Ok, so Clint is a little type cast as he does mean and moody so well, plus with some parts "they" can't just cast one of the taller black actors as in a lot of parts, that wouldn't be believeable.

So it just seems that these industry is run by the short arsed mafia!

They keep all the good jobs to the shorties keeping the lofties in a sort of lanky box, only getting them out when they absolutely have to...

Rememberance - it's that time of year again......

Anyone who know's me, will be aware that I served with the Royal Navy, from September 87 to October 96.

I'm also a "card carrying" member of the Royal British Legion.

So it's no big surprise, that when the Rememberance weekend comes around every november, I can be a little maudlin. I usually look through the list of names at this website. Well not all of them, but from the date I "joined up" to the present day.

I do this, so I can try and properly remember the people who I worked with in one way or another during my time with the RN, who for whatever reason, died during their own service with the RN.

I'm gonna just list them, as I might otherwise, start to forget them, which would be disrespectful of their memory to my way of thinking.

They all died in different ways, mostly not in any kind of combat environment, but other, more "ordinary" ways i.e. car accidents, natural causes, etc etc. So here they are :-

Matthew (Stan) Baldwin - 11/11/91
Dean Marriott - 8/4/92
Michael (Mack) McKenna - 7/6/93
Preston W (Smudge) Smith - 9/10/95
Mark (Beasty) Beeston - 2/4/97
Stephen Atkins - 5/9/97
Carl Meagher - 10/12/98
Carolyn Crumplin - 24/11/02

Those are the people I spotted in the listing, there might be more. Hopefully, if there are, I'll spot them when I look through the list next year at about this time.

If nothing else, I remember them as all being nice, pleasant, good people. So as long as I'm around, you won't have been forgotten.......

Taxation changes to help the economy ?

Apparently, a group of "City Financial experts" is recommending that the "poison dwarf" a.k.a. George Osbourne MP, the current chancellor of the exchequer, change the current taxation rules about the top rate of 50% tax, and reduce it to the current "higher rate" of 40%, as it will help the economy.

Funny that eh! Probably pure chance, that the "City Financial experts" are most likely to be among the highest earners paying the "top rate".

So no conflict of interest there then!.........

Personally, while I don't object to people who work hard at their given profession/job etc, to being paid a bonus for success, what I do object to is the ridiculously high bonuses that are paid by the "City". I believe that government should legislate against any bonuses that are larger than the persons annual salary level.

After all, these people are some of the highest earners in the country, which enables them to live a very pleasant, comfortable lifestyle. So to limit their annual bonuses to match their annual salary, isn't exactly a "kick in the bollocks". It's a very nice, sizeable "thanks for your efforts/hard work this year".

It would give a larger slice of the financial cake to share holders, who, after all, are the ones that provide the finance for the dealers/brokers/experts to play at "casino" in the financial markets in the first place......

Ah well, nothing like that is likely to happen until any type of business/corporate "lobbying" is criminalised. Likewise, any "legal person" status is removed from business as well.

All about as likely as building airports for squadrons of flying pigs..........

the "Big Conference"....

While I remember (and am already on my "soap box" from the previous post), last weeks big conference, held in London and chaired by the UK government (I believe), was also featured on "Click".

There was a nice interview with William Hague (or William Vague as I like to refer to him) MP. They asked various questions about what it was all about and what difference it might make, given that there's all sorts of such IT related "talking shops" already in existence. He gave a suitably bland response to the questions in that "government/ministerial" sort of way.

Yet I couldn't help getting the feeling, that while they asked "Joe Public" for his input, as well as the various industry and government groups to take part, that it was basically about getting the ideas/knowledge of how we all use the net and what else is going on from a potential criminality point of view, just so they can get ideas of how to make further policy of how "it" can be used in the future.

Lets face it, governments are control freaks, and god forbid, that we can communicate with each other directly. That could lead to all sorts of anarchy, like the much lauded "Arab Spring" or the rather less popular "London riots". God forbid, that societies scum bags, and other lower orders get out of hand, so they can obtain their new track suits, designer trainers and plasma screen tellies for nothing. Make them use their benefits, you know, the ones that they have left over after buying their cigarettes, booze and paying their monthly Sky subscriptions.......

No, hang on, it wasn't them was it. It was "the gangsta's" and RIM (the makers of Blackberry smartphones) fault wasn't it.

Heaven knows, the government doesn't like to tell the truth and point the finger at poor parenting, years of taking away methods of successful social control, that has been led by the progressive, outspoken, liberal minority.

Ha ha! of course not. Because if they did tell the truth, then they wouldn't get voted back in would they.......

Tech news and stuff......

One of my favourite TV programmes has got to be "BBC Click". They manage to give well presented, lively, interesting reports on newer technology.

Now I say "newer" because they stuff they show isn't always new, just that there's been a new piece of kit that does "X" that they highlight. In this weeks show, it was about so called "Black box" recorders for cars, that record and measure the car/driver ability.

This isn't new, I saw something like this, what ?, 3 years ago. It comes under the term "Telematics".

It would appear that now, the insurance companies are starting to take more of an interest (not that they ignored it before). They seem to be on the verge of using systems like this, in conjunction with a "financial carrot" of lower insurance costs. Hell, the BBC click programme even got an interview with someone from DHL because they've installed "forward facing cameras" in 600 of their trucks.

Now I'm not against anything that genuinely makes driving safer, but so many of the "good idea club ideas" are just there, so management of businesses that involve/use some sort of road transport, can point the finger.

These devices will continue to be pointless until they can maintain a 360 degree view of the road round a vehicle, so that in the event of an accident, investigators can get a full understanding of the road conditions and what's going on at any given time.

Having mentioned the DHL action above, I'll continue to use goods vehicles as an example.....

So, as any vehicle over 3.5 tonnes gross weight have now been fitted with speed limiters (56 mph I believe, but have also read that the EU directive is for limiting to 10% below the normal vehicles maximum legal road speed).

Now imagine the scenario, with the vehicle trundling down the motorway, with the pedal down, only to come across some crusty old bastard, who thinking that they're saving the planet, sits in the nearside lane at 50mph (I'm not pointing the finger at the older driver per se, but it really does seem to be people of that group who drive like this). Ok, fine I hear you say, just overtake them. Which is Ok, except the longer the vehicle, the harder it is to judge the safe distance to pull back into the appropriate lane, especially when the only way to see where said "crusty old bastard" is positioned, is the use of the near side (a.k.a. "blind side") mirrors.

Well, if you're lucky and the crusty concerned, is a well mannered person, who tries to be considerate, will actually let the truck back in. Whereas what you get in reality, is a miserable old scroat, who thinks "I'm not gonna sit behind that bloody great truck" and speeds up, too "undertake" the truck. Leaving nothing else for the truck driver to do but pull back into the nearside, and eventually catch up with the crusty, who by now, has dropped their speed back down to 50mph again.

What you end up with, is an accident waiting to happen.

So rather than thinking up some clever technological method of pointing the finger, how about making refresher training mandatory ?

The transport world has recently moved over to having to provide 35 hours of "extra training" in a 5 year period (known as a "drivers CPC" a.k.a. drivers certificate of professional competency"). Now at the moment, the drivers CPC scheme is a bit of a joke. Each minimum 7 hour training period, isn't a pass or fail, it doesn't even have any specific syllabus. Just the requirement that it's attended. So it could be "how to make a good cup of tea and bacon sandwich" (yes, I know, that's extrapolating to the "nth degree"). And that "course" is attended 5 times in 5 years.

Fucking brilliant move there Europe, eh!

So why not make it a little more specific ? and focus it on safer, more defensive driving techniques ? Something like one session every 2 or 3 years ? Oh, and make it mandatory for holders of all driving licences. As to whether it should be pass or fail, is probably a different question, as it should be enough to appease any industry groups who'd complain that if it was pass or fail, that all of a sudden, their costs of retaining drivers would go through the roof.....

Lets face it, the vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by "car drivers", who think that once they've passed their initial road test, that they're "good drivers". Whereas in truth, they're not, the majority aren't even particularly safe drivers. That's not to say that they're all bad, because they're not, but their driving often depends on what it is that they're driving for or too.... i.e. if it's holiday or some other sort of rest/leisure activity, then they're more patient, whereas if it's going to work, or getting somewhere for work etc, then they are suffering from a certain amount of pressure to get somewhere a bit quicker, in a less safe way, than they might otherwise do.

After all, there is so much visual info that we're supposed to be able to assimilate at any given time when driving, then it's a surprise that more accidents don't happen.

Plus, if the insurance industry is given "carte blanche" to insist on installing such monitoring equipment, then they are having "their hand" strengthened even further than now, given that motoring insurance is a statutory requirement. They use that dominant social position to bleed the hell out of drivers of all kinds.....

And I for one, would prefer to see genuine, honest figures as to how the varying different social groups actually cost to insure, and not the usual drummed up, statistical lies that they roll out as an excuse to squeeze yet more money out of us........

And yes, I am being cynical. I've seen such changes abused so many times, when all any specific problem needs, is to properly enforce existing legislation, or possibly create a little new piece, but it's the vested interests that want things a certain way, and lobby government until they get what they want. Business itself, might be necessary, but it's also a craven thief, when it comes to extracting money from the nations collective wallet.... And government does nothing about that (except to enjoy the continual flow of "corporate hospitality" - oh yes, that's right, it's ok for them to accept such goods/services/gifts, as long as they publish it in some hard to understand "register of interests")...........

An ordinary-ish week...

Well, overall, It's been an ordinary week from the point of view of a commercial driver. With the usual up's and downs of busy one day, quite the next.

I guess I'm lucky to not have a dedicated vehicle, just drive whatever the boss needs that day. No "nights out" parked up in shitty layby's moaning at the "JF's" to move their wagon as they've abandoned it in the middle, with no consideration to the rest of us who also need to use the layby, no waking up in the middle of the night busting for a crap, having to "curl one down" in the dark, under a trailer, etc etc.

The rest of the country don't understand how lucky they are, not having to put up with stringent working practices enforced by the stringent requirements of the various pieces of transport legislation, yet with such limited facilities afforded by the roadside here. Mainland Europe does a much better job of facilities for drivers, yet I suppose there's a number of reasons for that. Distances would be one, though the roads here probably need more facilities, because of the population density and that our major roads are probably among the most choked in the entire EU.

A couple of small changes to legislation are all that's needed. But the government don't like upsetting business, so that's not gonna happen is it !

What else ? Oh yes. That was a nasty accident that was reported yesterday, on the Somerset section of the M5. A number of deaths and 20 plus vehicles involved. Perhaps driving too fast in the reported wet and foggy conditions ? Or maybe people driving too close (in truck blind spots) or something like that ? Too early to say I suppose, though people seem to do some really stupid things on the roads, around large vehicles. They seem to have zero idea about how hard it can be to drive a 44 tonner safely, they tailgate, they cut in too soon, all manner of stupidity, and wonder why their vehicle loses the battle. They're often lucky only to get their precious car written off, and not to get killed in some hideous way....

But you cant tell the stupid fucker....... because after all, they are "good" drivers, aren't they.......

NOT !