What a State We Are In.

Very little time for blogging at the moment but I did want to share this which is a quote from A. J. P., Taylor in the book English History 1914 - 1945, published 1965.

“Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state, beyond the post office and the policeman. He could live where he liked and as he liked. He had no official number or identity card. He could travel abroad or leave his country for ever without a passport or any sort of official permission. He could exchange his money for any other currency without restriction or limit. He could buy goods from any country in the world on the same terms as he bought goods at home. For that matter, a foreigner could spend his life in this country without permit and without informing the police. Unlike the countries of the European continent, the state did not require its citizens to perform military service. An Englishman could enlist, if he chose, in the regular army, the navy, or the territorials. He could also ignore, if he chose, the demands of national defence. Substantial householders were occasionally called on for jury service. Otherwise, only those helped the state who wished to do so. The Englishman paid taxes on a modest scale: nearly £200 million in 1913-14, or rather less than 8 per cent. of the national income. The state intervened to prevent the citizen from eating adulterated food or contracting certain infectious diseases. It imposed safety rules in factories, and prevented women, and adult males in some industries, from working excessive hours. The state saw to it that children received education up to the age of 13. Since 1 January 1909, it provided a meagre pension for the needy over the age of 70. Since 1911, it helped to insure certain classes of workers against sickness and unemployment. This tendency towards more state action was increasing. Expenditure on the social services had roughly doubled since the Liberals took office in 1905. Still, broadly speaking, the state acted only to help those who could not help themselves. It left the adult citizen alone.


All this was changed by the impact of the Great War. The mass of the people became, for the first time, active citizens. Their lives were shaped by orders from above; they were required to serve the state instead of pursuing exclusively their own affairs. Five million men entered the armed forces, many of them (though a minority) under compulsion. The Englishman’s food was limited, and its quality changed, by government order. His freedom of movement was restricted; his conditions of work prescribed. Some industries were reduced or closed, others artificially fostered. The publication of news was fettered. Street lights were dimmed. The sacred freedom of drinking was tampered with: licensed hours were cut down, and the beer watered by order. The very time on the clocks was changed. From 1916 onwards, every Englishman got up an hour earlier in summer than he would otherwise have done, thanks to an act of parliament. The state established a hold over it citizens which, though relaxed in peacetime, was never to be removed and which the second World war was again to increase. The history of the English state and of the English people merged for the first time.”

On a Lighter Note

See this for a list of some of the more bizarre complaints allegedly sent in by Thomas Cook customers. It is difficult to believe that these are genuine but if they are ...

Listen to your Leader

Via Witterings from Witney comes this, a message from Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council, talking about the European Council meeting on Friday 4 February.
.
There is a transcript of his speech here.

Incidentally, do you remember voting for him, for a single energy market, for interconnectedness, for one single market of brains? No, neither do I.

Update
Surprise, surprise, at 06.53 this morning on the Today programme on  BBC Radio 4 there was an article explaining how we need a European-wide network for electricity transmission in order to move "power from the sun in the south and from the wind in the north." How incredibly fortuitous that they chose to highlight this burning problem on exactly the same day as the Council of Europe are about to discuss it. Bizarre that the reporter never mentioned the Council of Europe though.

Wind Turbine Accidents

Thanks to EU Referendum I found myself perusing the "Summary of Wind Turbine Accident data to 31 December 2010". It is fascinating. Did you know that there were 18 incidents of blade failure last year? Or that pieces of failed blades have been known to travel over 1300 metres (6.5 furlongs or 0.8 mile)? However, for me the most remarkable fact is that there were 5 fatal accidents last year, clearly it is a dangerous business.

Statistics above come from Caithness Windfarm Information Forum (www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk)

Wet

This is well worth watching, is safe for work and you don't need to hear it.



What would you do after that, especially if you were on your way to work?

Back Down to Earth

Since writing the previous blog I have discovered that Pekka Pohjola died 27 November, 2008 and Bo Hansson died April 24, 2010. What with the recent deaths of Gerry Rafferty, Pete Postlethwaite and Professor Sir Maurice Wilkes it would seem that I have reached a certain age.

Esoteric Music Tastes

Whilst working on my computer this evening I decided to do what my children do which is use YouTube to provide some musical entertainment. I thought of some of the albums I had not listened to for a long time and came up with the following esoteric list of tracks that I fancied listening to again:

Pekka Pohjola, Mathematician’s Air Display, Title track
Bo Hansson, Lord of the Rings, The Black Riders
King Crimson, Lizard, Indoor Games
Kevin Ayers, Joy of a Toy, Girl on a Swing

I am still amazed that every single one of them was there. I had a lovely evening.

Repeated Highway Robbery

I thought it was time to update my post on how much petrol actually costs before the government gets involved, see original post here. The fuel duty is now at 58.95 pence per litre, see here and VAT is now at 20%. This means that the £1.239 per litre that I paid the night before last consists of 20.65p in VAT, 58.95p in fuel duty and 44.3p as the actual retail cost of the petrol. This means that I am now paying a total of 79.6p in tax on a litre of fuel. This is up from the 72.71p per litre I was paying last March which represents an increase of 9.5%. The cost of a litre of fuel has gone from £1.109 to £1.239 which is an increase of 11.7% which is larger than the tax increase thus the effective taxation rate has come down from 190.4% to 179.7%. The final sentence of this blog is depressingly similar to the previous one; it is sobering to note that the duty will increase by 1% above inflation every 1 April from 2011 to 2014.

A Lack of Respect

I was alerted to the existence of this story from Big Brother Watch. What I learnt is that a gentleman in Grimsby has been fined £175 and ordered to pay £250 costs after being found guilty of wilfully obstructing a police officer in the course of her duties. So, what did Mr Thompson do that led to him gaining a criminal record? Well he flashed his headlights to warn oncoming motorists of a mobile speed hand gun.


Now, forgive me for being naive but I thought that the point of a speed trap in any form was to encourage drivers to slow down. I think that Mr. Thompson’s actions were made with the same intent. So how can he be considered to have been ‘wilfully obstructing a police officer in the course of her duties’?

As a mathematician I am aware that a proof using Reduction Ad Absurdum means that an absurd consequence implies that the original hypothesis must be false. I have an absurd consequence, namely that Mr. Thompson as obstructing the police officer when he intended to effect the same outcome. Thus my hypothesis that a speed trap exists to reduce speed must be false. This leaves me to conclude that the only reason that the police officer was there was to capture speeding drivers in order to gain revenue.

There was a time when I used to have respect for policeman; I wonder when I lost it?

A Million Angry People

I posted earlier today about the lack of rebellion. It seems that I may be wrong. First read this litany of what is wrong with this country’s government. Then read, if you haven’t already, about the surrender of our sovereignty noting in particular the last two paragraphs. Follow the ‘lawful and legal’ link to an article titled ‘Living by the Rule of Law’. Finally read Richard North’s call for a Million Angry People. Now will you do something?

I Must be Wrong

A series of links led me to this blog. Alarmed by what Ian Parker-Joseph had written I pasted part of the BIS quote into Google and arrived at the Top Stories section of the BIS website. Writ there for all to see, it says “The key to the new measures … will be the principle of copying out the text of European directives directly into UK law.” Is that not admitting that we do not run our own country anymore? Are we really paying 650 MPs a minimum of £65,738 per year just to cut-and-paste?

Maybe I am wrong in thinking that we are a sovereign state, which by definition is a state which administers its own government, and is not dependent upon, or subject to, another power. Perhaps the majority of this country is happy with being ruled by Brussels because that is the only reason I can imagine for the complete lack of criticism, lack of protest and lack of rebellion.

Words

On the drive in to work this morning I had two occasions to think about words. The first was when I heard that there had been a bad accident at the roundabout near Bracknell Sports Centre. Unfortunate for somebody as that was, I recalled that the offices opposite were occupied by a company called cadence. I have always liked the word cadence, I am tempted to say that the word has it's own rhythm but I shall refrain.
Later, a cyber-security expert was asked how a business could defend itself against denial-of-service attacks to which the expert replied that there were a number of ways that a business could ameliorate the threat. Ameliorate, isn't that a lovely word?
On the other hand  there are words I dislike. The words I dislike most are seersucker, gingham and especially bap.

Absolutely Crackers

Do you recall parliament debating The Pyrotechnic Articles (Safety) Regulations 2010? No, neither do I. I can tell you that these regulations stem from this countries requirement to implement (or transposition to use the government's terminology) the European Directive on the placing on the market of pyrotechnic articles, 2007/23/EC (see discussion paper here).

Following the consultation exercise this was then discussed by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, JCSI, as can be seen in the annex (search for 1554) to the report of the meeting dated 21 July 2010 here. The annex lists the regulations under the title 'Instruments subject to annulment' which sounds a bit odd since the legislation doesn't exist. However, the way that Statutory Instruments are handled are explained in a word document snappily titled "Statutory Instrument Practice. A manual for those concerned with the preparation of statutory instruments and the parliamentary procedures relating to them" (follow link from here). On page 65 it explains how the negative procedure works. As far as I can tell it is this negative procedure that the JCSI are applying to the proposed pyrotechnic regulations. As you will have understood if you have ploughed through the 'use of negative procedure' explanation, the instrument is laid before the house and if either house resolves within 40 days that the 'address be presented to Her Majesty praying that the instrument be annulled, no further proceedings may be taken under the instrument after the date of the resolution, and Her Majesty may by Order in Council revoke it'. In other words if nobody does anything in forty days then it becomes law.

Thus there never was any debate about these regulations and they are now law. Amongst these regulations are the fact that Christmas crackers are category 1 fireworks. In regulation 15(2) it states that the 'minimum age limit for supply of category 1 fireworks is 16 years'. So now your shopkeeper will have to check the age of the people to whom it sells Christmas crackers. All because the following 12 people didn't think it would be a problem:

Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Lord Clinton-Davis (Labour)
Baroness Eccles (Conservative)
Earl of Mar and Kellie (Liberal Democrat)
Lord Rees Mogg (Crossbench)
Baroness Stern (Crossbench)
Mr George Mudie MP (Labour, Leeds East) (Chairman)
Mr Robert Buckland MP (Conservative, South Swindon)
Michael Ellis MP (Conservative, Northampton North)
John Hemming MP (Liberal Democrat, Birmingham, Yardley)
Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger MP (Conservative, Bridgwater and West Somerset)
Toby Perkins MP (Labour, Chesterfield)

Is that how democracy is meant to work?

Wind Farms

Wind farms are stupid. When we need power, the wind doesn't blow. This week is a pretty good example of this phenomenon.
Take a look at this article from the Independent in September, it states that "The 100-turbine Thanet wind farm ... brings the UK's total power from onshore and offshore wind to more than 5GW". I have no reason to dispute this figure but I would contend that it is misleading. Looking at the table below one learns that currently wind farms are producing 141 MW (the table comes from here) which, if the 5GW value is to be believed, is a paltry 2.82% of their maximum ability.

Did I mention that the temperature is low at the moment? That means that we need electricity to help keep us warm. This graph is a good illustration of the amount of electricity we need, as you can see we currently need between 42 GW and 60 GW.



The wind farms are managing to furnish, at best, 0.3% of that requirement.

Pathetic and a waste of our money.

This is a Blog Entry Title

This is an excellent article.

Paul Chambers

I could not have put it better myself, see here.

Your Money or Your Life

You may well be aware that at the moment letters from HMRC are being sent out to individuals who have paid too much or too little tax through the PAYE system. As far as I can ascertain this is because the individuals were given the wrong tax code, whatever the reason, it seems to be universally agreed that the root cause is due to HMRC.
Imagine my surprise then when I heard that HMRC are proposing that we move to a system where your employer pays your gross salary to them, they make the tax deductions and then put the net amount in your bank account. The details are in this consultation document. What made me laugh when I read it, was the first line of paragraph 5.13 which read

“HMRC would be responsible for ensuring deductions were correct”.

Privacy

I urge you to read this.

Averages

From an article in today's Daily Telegraph, "... it is logistically impossible for the average man to have more partners than the average woman." Discuss.

A Challenge

If manufacturing output in the UK, excluding oil and mining, in 2005 is 100 what value do think output was in 1990? In 1980?


The answers are:

a) In 1990 the output index was 93.3
b) In 1980 the output index was 77.2

Clearly rumours of the death of our manufacturing ability are exaggerated

These values were taken from the Governments own statistics that as you can see here.

Other Peoples Money

Last night at our parish council we had our annual look at the finances. This is the time when we are presented with the balance sheet, then the income and expenditure sheet and finally the annual return. We all scrutinise the figures whilst trying to make sense of it and make sensible comments. Then we have to all answer yes to the following questions:

1. we have approved the statement of accounts which have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Accounts and Audit Regulations and proper practices.
2. we have maintained an adequate system of internal control, including measures designed to prevent and detect fraud and corruption and reviewed its effectiveness.
3. we have taken all reasonable steps to assure ourselves that there are no matters of actual or potential non-compliance with laws, regulations and codes of practice which could have a significant financial effect on the ability of the council to conduct its business or on its finances.
4. we have provided proper opportunity during the year for the exercise of electors' rights in accordance with the requirements of the Accounts and Audit Regulations.
5. we have carried out an assessment of the risks facing the council and taken appropriate steps to manage those risks, including the introduction of internal controls and/or external insurance cover where required.
6. we have maintained throughout the year an adequate and effective system of internal audit of the council's accounting records and control systems and carried out a review of its effectiveness
7. we have taken appropriate action on all matters raised in reports from internal and external audit.
8. we have considered whether any litigation, liabilities or commitments, events or transactions, occurring either during or after the year end, have a financial impact on the council and, where appropriate have included them in the statement of accounts.
9. Trust funds- in our capacity as the sole managing trustee we have discharged our responsibility in relation to the accountability for the fund(s)/assets, including financial reporting and, if required, indepenent examination or audit.

Our internal auditor has to answer a similar set of questions. The form containing the return figures, our answers and the internal auditor's answers is then sent to an external auditor. This is all to ensure that we are not abusing the parishioners' money and quite right too. The last thing we want is for people in a position of trust taking advantage of the money handed over by the people that they should be serving. Bear that in mind whilst you read this http://tinyurl.com/2eudr86.

A Right to Free Speech?

Amongst the fuss and palaver about proportional voting systems and coalitions you might have overlooked the fact that a dangerous criminal was brought to book today. Paul Chambers, 26 has been fined £385 and told to pay £600 costs after being found guilty. He has already lost his job as a trainee accountant as a result of his arrest and prosecution.
This convicted criminal will find it hard to get work and quite right you might think. His crime? To tweet “Crap! Robin Hood Airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!”.
Not the cleverest comment, some might even think it is not funny, but can you honestly support spending tax payers money on a prosecution and condemning a man for the rest of his life just because of a tweet. Words fail me.
For the full story see here and here.

Will it be a Lib-Lab Pact After All?

So, Gordon Brown has announced his resignation and Clegg has opened negotiations with the Labour party. I think that this could be the end of David Cameron and his disastrous policy of, er, not having a policy. The inability of the opposition party to capitalise on an abysmal thirteen years in power must surely lead to the Tory party tearing itself apart. Let us hope that something more like the real Tory party emerges from this act of self-destruction.

STV or AV?

The Electoral Reform Society have published a news release titled “STV & the parliament that might have been”. The release shows three tables which illustrate how the results of last week’s poll would have been had we been using either the single transferable vote, STV, or the alternative vote, AV, systems. The tables are as follows:

It looks like we would have been stuck with a hung parliament whichever system had been used. The question is would STV or AV always result in a hung parliament as many suspect? A quote from Dr Ken Ritchie, Chief Executive of the Electoral Reform Society, would seem to support that when he says “The parliament that might have been would also have brought a hung parliament. But with STV, coalitions, cooperation and debate aren’t aberrations, they are the rule.” Do we want to have a coalition after each election?

Result Misery

There is one thing that has been bothering me during the recent campaigning and that is every time a politician talks about halving the deficit, interviewers and analysts respond as if the topic under discussion is halving the debt. Why has nobody pointed out that they are not the same thing? If I spend £15,000 last year when I had £10,000 income and then prudently halve my deficit this year to £2,500 then my debt will have increased by 50% to £7,500. How is that better? It is just less worse than it might have been. Running a deficit of any size increases debt and I was led to believe that our debt was already too high.
Still it may be just a pipe-dream that I will ever see this country with a negligible debt. Take a look at the post titled ‘Tackling Our Fiscal Black Hole - People Ain't Dumb’ by Wat Tyler on Burning Our Money which states that just to reduce our ‘government debt back to the maximum safe sustainable level relative to national income (the maximum level reckoned by the IMF and others to be 60%)’ we need to:
cut spending or increase taxes by £180bn pa. Which in round numbers is the equivalent of:

• £7000 pa extra taxes/ lower spending per household;
• increase in the basic rate of income tax to 65p; or
• increase in the standard rate of VAT to 57%; or
• 25% off total public spending

Just look at those numbers, 65% income tax, 57% VAT. We really are in a bad way.

Which Button Would You Click?

Click for larger image

During the course of installing Adobe Reader this morning I was presented with the dialogue box illustrated above. The second sentence asks "Once instalation is complete, stop installing all other applications?" Which button would you click on and what do you think would happend then?

What A Tangled Web

A European Parliament press release issued on Wednesday 7th April starts with the sentence “The Constitutional Affairs Committee gave its support on Wednesday to a modification of the Lisbon Treaty that would allow 18 new Members of the European Parliament to take their seats during the ongoing legislature.” The essence of the release is revealed in the next paragraph where it state “The number of MEPs needs to be increased because the June European Parliament elections were held under the rules of the Nice Treaty, which sets the number of MEPs at 736, while the new Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force on 1st December 2009, allows 751 seats.”
Those of you that are good at mathematics will have noticed 18 MEPs in addition to the existing 736 MEPs will result in 754 MEPs not 751. The reason for this apparent discrepancy is because Germany is to lose 3 of its MEPs. However, there are strict rules governing the curtailment of a mandate so Germany will retain its 99 MEPs until the end of this parliament meaning that there will be 754 MEPs after all. This is the nub of the problem, the Lisbon treaty does not allow for a parliament to have 754 MEPs which means the treaty will have to be amended. It the amendment is approved by parliament it will then have to be ratified by the 27 Member states.
As pointed out by Daniel Hannan in his blog, the Conservative party has committed itself to a referendum on treaty changes thus, it would seem, that we have the prospect of a referendum far sooner than one might have anticipated. Inspecting the online Conservative manifesto one finds that it says “A Conservative Government would change the law so that never again would a government be able to agree to a Treaty that hands over areas of power from Britain to the EU without a referendum.” Since we are one of the countries that will see an increase in the number of its MEPs, we are to have one more, I hardly think that this comes under the heading of handing over power from Britain to the EU. I suspect that, delightful as the prospect might be, we will not be granted a referendum on this particular matter.

Who is Responsible for my Daughter?

I decided some time ago to opt out of the NHS Summary Care Record scheme and a letter from our local Primary Care trust explaining all about the scheme was the trigger for me to do something about it. I rang the telephone number in the letter and requested an opt-out form. Three weeks later I rang again to be told that they would note my request and send a form but was I aware that I could collect a form from my GP? Thus, a week later, I left work early specifically to get to my GPs before they closed at 18.30. On arrival I asked for two forms as, at that time, my fourteen-year old daughter was inclined to opt out as well. They only had one form but suggested that I could download one from the internet but they did not know where on the internet.
Fortunately, a blog that I occasionally read called Big Brother Watch wrote about opting out and provided the very link that I required. I duly printed two copies and set about filling them in. Then I noticed that he form clearly states that it should be completed "by the individual (data subject) making the request." Leaving aside the awful phrase data subject and whether it adds any value to the sentence, I was confused about whether I could fill this in for my daughter. So, I rang the NHS Care Records Service Information Line on 0845 603 8510 and enquired as to how I should proceed. The gentleman on the other end told me that I could complete the form for my daughter but my GP had the right to ignore my request if he or she thought it in the best interests of the child.
So who is responsible for my daughter?

Through the Back Doorway

There are some odd beliefs in our world and I think that this is one that is up at the bizarre end of the spectrum.
Does this sentence actually make sense "Frequencies of Brilliance is referred to as a self-remembrance work because the activation that occurs as the body is touched awakens at the quantum level your spiritual aspect"?
I challenge you to read all of the following passage which is taken from this page on the same website. If you do get to the end, would you be so kind as to let me know what it all means?

The Self Healing Prophecy, What is It?

The Self Healing Prophecy is an energy that began to be anchored on our planet by the Pleiadians in November 2008 in a Public Transmission in St Paul, Minnesota.

These energies are going to continue to anchor until the year 2012, they are here to assist us in the transformation of our self realization process, and in the transformation of our planet from a 3rd dimensional energy to a 4th/5th dimensional planet.

The energies of the Self healing Prophecy are here to begin to align you with aspects of your natural birthright, which is abundance on all levels. You will begin to utilize other levels of the Prophecy energy as it will assist you to open up to working with your natural state of physical self healing, and becoming conscious in co- creating your world and co- creating your abundance on all levels. You will begin to align with higher light aspects of your Self, resurrecting yourself from the self judgment and opening into a new sense of freedom within your life and within your self. The Prophecy energy is designed to awaken you into a new lightness of spirit and a new sense of yourself within this world and your place within the Universal Consciousness.

The Prophecy accelerates your ability to move into a new awareness of your role here on this planet and aligns you to the support that is here for you within the Universe. As you awaken to the truth of your alignment and place with this Universal consciousness you can open up to the unlimited aspects of Self that links you into a deep understanding and knowledge of your place within the whole. These energies will move you deeper into a state of oneness, back to meet the truth of yourself and the Unconditional love that exists within this connection.

So that as you open to yourself to this truth, this love creates an openness towards all people in your world. Your heart will be able to transform itself with these new energies, and you will begin to work within your Sacred heart. Your new compassionate heart will begin to transmit the love out, so that you will begin to feel the true connection to other people through your heart, These heart connections are important. They are important for your planet right now because of the changing energies that are taking place, these new heart energies are needed for the awakening of all human beings, for the soul connections and the soul groups that will be coming together.

The Prophecy energies will assist soul groups to find each other, and help each group to come together and do the work that each one of you have come to fulfill at this time.
The Prophecy energy is also designed for you to become more aligned with the Spiritual energies in a new way, with a deeper and more conscious connection to them, so that you can work in partnership with Spirit and with energetic realms.

The Self Healing Prophecy energy will assist you in this transition of a new way to consciously live, so that you will move and be able to align yourself to your personal purpose here on the earth, and be able to be active with your purpose.

You will be able to do this more readily because you have an access to Spirit, so you will be able to utilize the help that is available for you within the spiritual realms on a conscious level. It’s going to help you to consciously re-align yourself to your energetic blueprint which you created for yourself before you came to this planet to live your life. This blueprint is like a map for this lifetime, your mission for yourself, having access to this will bring you a deeper understanding of your mission.

As the inner war with yourself changes, the inner wars with other people in your life also changes. The separation begins to end and love takes the place of separation. Your world is going to transform with this conscious love growing.

As the love begins to grow within your world, with yourself and others, and Spirit you will begin to take your place and feel your place within your world, within your Universe and be able to utilize on a conscious level the help and support that is here for you during this transition time on your planet.

Know that we the Pleiadians play an important role with you as you begin to work with this Self Healing Prophecy energy.

Should you want to avail yourself of a practitrioner of the above arts then the College Surgery Partnership has one, see here.

Highway Robbery

As I was filling my car with petrol last night I was pondering the cost of the liquid that was pouring into the tank. A little research here reveals that the government levies a duty of 56.19p per litre of unleaded petrol. Given that VAT is calculated on the price of the petrol and the duty, this means that the petrol I was purchasing for 110.9p was actually being sold by the petrol company at 38.19p per litre. This means that I was being charged a staggering 72.71p per litre which is equivalent to a tax rate of 190.4%. It is sobering to note that the duty will increase by 1% above inflation every 1 April from 2010 to 2013.

The Equivalent of 2,018 Words.

I could not resist posting pictures of Andrew and Rachel from our recent holiday in Sharm El Sheikh.

I Couldn't Have Put it Better

I cannot recall ever agreeing with an opinion expressed by George Monbiot in his articles in The Guardian. However, yesterday he wrote an excellent article on a topic which, as he points out, should have resulted in greater coverage and discussion. Thus I find myself in a position that I never expected to be in, namely, endorsing the sentiments of and encouraging you to read this.

Petition

If anybody still reads this blog then they will know that I fall into the skeptic camp when it comes to the issue of anthropogenic global warming. If you feel the same then you might be interested in signing this petition.

Could you be a Primary School Matematics Teacher?

Here are four questions from a test comprising "27 straightforward maths questions" which were presented to 155 ­primary school teachers for the Channel 4 documentary series Dispatches. The number in brackets at the end of each question is the percentage of the tested teachers who answered the question correctly.

Q1: The mean height of a group of four people is 2m. One more person joins the group and then the mean height is 1·9m. What is the height of the new person? (14)

Q2: ABCDE is a pentagon. Name all its diagonals. (25)

Q3: Assume 5 miles = 8 km. If I travel at 40mph, how long will I take to cover 32km? (32)

Q4: 112 x 22 = 2,464. What is the value of 1.12 x 2.2? (54)

See here for the story in the Guardian complete with the answers and here for the Despatches web page on the topic. Note that the second episode will be shown tonight at 8.00 pm.

The source for this entry is the redoutable Frank Chalk.

Blowing hot and cold

Time magazine has an article titled "Another Blizzard: What Happened to Global Warming?" which is an example of a weather-is-not-climate article. I have no argument with people pointing out that today's weather in X neither proves nor disproves global warming/anthropogenic global warming/climate change*. What worries me is that it doesn't make sense. The beginning of the fifth paragraph says:

But as far as winter storms go, shouldn't climate change make it too warm for snow to fall? Eventually that is likely to happen — but probably not for a while. In the meantime, warmer air could be supercharged with moisture and, as long as the temperature remains below 32°F, it will result in blizzards rather than drenching winter rainstorms.

So, warm air becomes supercharged with moisture as long as it is below 32°F? As far as I know, air at less than 32°F will hold as much moisture as air at less than 32°F has always done. Warm air must surely mean air above 32°F in which case it is not below 32°F. In which case this snippet is nonsensical.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962294,00.html?xid=rss-topstories#ixzz0fETxKg1Z


* delete the terms you don't like.

I wonder why ...

... sinks are recessed but urinals are not?

UKIP and Climate Change

Viscount Monckton, better known as Christopher Monckton, the journalist and author has today joined the UK Independence Party. Read the whole story here.

Temperature

For a very easy to read discussion of the range of temperatures measured at one point on the earth's surface please read this.

Tata Redcar

I was going to paraphrase an excellent blog from EU referendum but I cannot do it justice. Go and read it in situ.

A uniform climate

Go to google, switch to images, type 'weather presenter' in to the search field and then press Search Images. What do you notice about the results?

Reflecting on Sunlight

There are some beautiful pictures, here, of the solar power plant in Sanlucar la Mayor, Spain. Reading the captions, I found myself wondering whether the amount of electricity to control the plant and move the mirrors so that they tracked the sun was less than the amount the power plant produced. I figured that nobody would be stupid enough to design and build a power plant that consumed more energy than it produced. When I arrived at the tenth and final image, the caption informed me that "Andalusia is one of the sunniest, driest spots in Europe, with an average of 1,500 hours of sunshine a year". 1,500 hours is an awful lot isn't it? The problem is, do you know how many hours there are in a year? It is 8,760. That means, assuming that this plant is capable of working all the time the sun shines, that the electricity is produced for just 17.1% of the time. Assuming the electricity is only needed during daylight hours, it still only produces electricity for 34.2% of the time. What bloomin' use is that? Can you imagine anyone in the Dragon's Den having a good reception when they revealed that the device they are attempting to market only works during daylight hours and then for only the one third of those hours when the sun chose to shine? When they say that it will provide the electricity for 180,000 homes, equivalent to the needs of the city of Seville, they don't say that they only do it for an average of four hours of every day. I wouldn't want my freezer to be relying on their electricity.

Not surprisingly, the plant was built with the help of 5 million Euro from the EU's 5th Framework Programme (no, I hadn't heard of it either). The EU seems keen on projects like this as illustrated by the EU Energy Commissioner, Andris Piebalgs', comment that "These new technologies give Europe a new option to combat climate change and increase energy security while strengthening the competitiveness of the European industrial sector and creating jobs and growth,". Creating jobs and growth with four hours of electricity a day? I despair.

If Footprint > Ration Then £100.00, ching, thank you

Can you think of one positive comment to make about this? It has left me speechless (write-less?)

Today's the Day

I couldn't let this pass without comment, today in 1752 was September 14th however yesterday in 1752 was September 2nd. It was the day that the British Empire skipped eleven days in order to change to the Gregorian calendar.
It is called the Gregorian calendar after Pope Gregory XIII who described the new calendar in a Papal Bull issued on February 24th 1582. Spain, Portugal, Italy and France, amongst others, all adopted the new calendar before the end of the year. As you can see it took 170 years before Britain decided to adopt the calendar that we still use today.
Lady Day is on 25th March and was, prior to 1752, the first day of the New Year. This meant that, for example, 24th March 1700 was followed by 25th March 1701. This was the day that debts were settled and, in particular, the tax year finished. It was decided that the loss of eleven days in September 1752 would unfairly shorten the tax year so it was moved back to the 5th April which remains to this day as the end of our tax year.

I Don't Understand Polar Bears

I am having problems understanding this article in today's Daily Telegraph.
This graph shows the extent of the sea ice in the Arctic. As you can see it goes up in the winter and down in the summer. This year seems pretty consistent with the previous years this century.
This graph shows the daily mean temperature north of the 80th northern parallel, as a function of the day of year. The blue line is at what we call 0 Celsius. AS you can see there are only about 80 days of the year when the temperature gets above freezing.
This chart shows the status of the populations in 2005 and is the most recent I can find. Of the nineteen sub-populations five are declining, five are stable, two are increasing and there is insufficient data on the remaining seven.
What conclusion would you draw?

I'm Sorry

Dr. Alan Turing has long been a person I admired. Not surprising really given that he became an eminent person in the two disciplines I enjoy, namely mathematics and computing. I read Andrew Hodges biography many years ago, in fact my first cat was called Enigma after the title of that book, Alan Turing: The Enigma of Intelligence*. I have visited Bletchley Park on numerous occasions. In short I am fairly familiar with Dr. Turing's life.
Today I wake up to hear that the Prime Minister has written an article for the Daily Telegraph in which he apologises for the way Dr. Turing was treated. What nonsense is this?
I fail to see how one can say sorry for something that one has not actually had any part in. In fact Mr. Brown makes it worse by saying "we're sorry" as if he is speaking for me. He is not. I might regret the way that this country treated Dr. Turing but how can I possibly apologise for it?
This politically correct diatribe includes the phrase "his treatment was of course utterly unfair". What definition of unfair is Mr. Brown using? Not one that I can make any sense of. He was tried and found guilty of a crime. The fact that we no longer consider his actions to be criminal doesn't mean that he was treated unfairly.
Mr. Brown's apology is misguided and pointless. It is a waste of time to apologise to a man that is dead, where there are no surviving members of the family and the speaker has had no involvement in the act being apologised for. The words that sum up this folly are vacuous, illogical, misguided and a complete and utter load of bollocks waste of time.


* The version available today appears to have a shorter title, Alan Turing: The Enigma.

A Chilling Vision of the Future

I heartily recommend a read of this from the always considered blog numberwatch.

A Blanket Analogy

I have not, as you might think, been lazy of late but rather I have been uninspired by what I have read in the media and in other blogs. I suspect that it is no coincidence that this is the silly season. However, I did find the discourse at the 'Watts up with That' website titled 'A simple analogy on climate modeling – looking for the red spot' very interesting, I recommend that you have a read.

The Beginning of a Backlash?

The American Physical Society on November 18, 2007, adopted the following policy:

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.
The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.
Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.

It is indicative of our times that a learned society, whose founding mission was "to advance and diffuse the knowledge of physics", has no qualms with adopting a policy that includes the phrase "The evidence is incontrovertible". Any scientist will tell you that nothing is incontrovertible. A number of people thought that this policy was not acceptable and wrote an open letter to the APS urging the council to revise its policy on climate change, see here.

On the 22 July, 2009, the weekly journal Nature published the following letter from six APS members (one can only see the version in Nature if one subscribes)

Petitioning for a revised statement on climate change
By S. Fred Singer, Hal Lewis, Will Happer, Larry Gould, Roger Cohen & Robert H. Austin
We write in response to your issue discussing “the coming climate crunch”, including the Editorial ‘Time to act‘ (Nature 458, 10771078; 2009). We feel it is alarmist.
We are among more than 50 current and former members of the American Physical Society (APS) who have signed an open letter to the APS Council this month, calling for a reconsideration of its November 2007 policy statement on climate change (see open letter at http://tinyurl.com/lg266u; APS statement at http://tinyurl.com/56zqxr). The letter proposes an alternative statement, which the signatories believe to be a more accurate representation of the current scientific evidence. It requests that an objective scientific process be established, devoid of political or financial agendas, to help prevent subversion of the scientific process and the intolerance towards scientific disagreement that pervades the climate issue.
On 1 May 2009, the APS Council decided to review its current statement via a high-level subcommittee of respected senior scientists. We applaud this decision. It is the first such reappraisal by a major scientific professional society that we are aware of, and we hope it will lead to meaningful change that reflects a more balanced view of climate-change issues

That the society is reviewing the statement is wonderful news.

The Royal Society, an institution that is even more venerable than the APS, is a proponent of climate change which has prompted Rupert Wyndham to write a letter to the society's president, Lord Rees. You can read it here. Unfortunately, I don't think we will see a similar review of the Royal Society's stance.

What's in a Phrase?

You may recall that we started with global warming. Then we had anthropogenic global warming which made it all mankind's fault. This became climate change presumably because the earth had inconveniently stopped showing any warming since 2002. What will it be next? Reading 'Climate and Energy Truths: Our Common Future', a report produced by ecoAmerica, I am led to believe, see the bottom of page 6, that it will be the phrase “deteriorating atmosphere". Look out for it being used in the papers or on television. When you spot it then you will know where it came from.

Data Sharing

One aspect of the Scientific Process is data sharing. Following publication, it is expected that a scientist will share the data so that others may reproduce the work. Reproduction is a crucial step in the process of making a theory acceptable. The Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy in the United States has the following to say on data sharing:

After publication, scientists expect that data and other research materials will be shared with qualified colleagues upon request. Indeed, a number of federal agencies, journals, and professional societies have established policies requiring the sharing of research materials. Sometimes these materials are too voluminous, unwieldy, or costly to share freely and quickly. But in those fields in which sharing is possible, a scientist who is unwilling to share research materials with qualified colleagues runs the risk of not being trusted or respected. In a profession where so much depends on interpersonal interactions, the professional isolation that can follow a loss of trust can damage a scientist's work.

Consequently, when the Met Office was approached for the raw data which underpins their climate change research it was expected that they would comply. Apart from anything else they are a public body and I, as a taxpayer, am of the opinion that that data is mine. When Steve McIntyre tried to get hold of the information he was told that he couldn't have it. What is curious is that this request was for a copy of the data that had been previously supplied to Peter Webster at Georgia Tech. If it was acceptable to supply him why was it not acceptable to send it to Steve McIntyre? Read the whole story here.

Update:
I notice that there is a petition on the Number 10 website that is asking the Prime Minister 'to Force the Climate Research Unit, or other publicly funded organisations to release the source codes used in their computer models', it can be found here.
26/07/2009 08.22

Making a Pig's Ear of it.

Because I have worn glasses since I was five years old I am very familiar with the eye-sight test. One of the aspects of the test, which hasn’t changed over the years, is the section where you wear an empty frame while the optician inserts lenses of different strengths asking questions like "Is this one clearer, or is this one?" I once suggested that I was giving contradictory answers to which the optician agreed. She added that it was her skill and experience that enabled her to identify the correct lens strength from these contradictory responses. Speaking to other opticians since, I have learnt that this is precisely the reason that the correct lens strength cannot be determined by a machine.

Doctors are similar. They listen to your description of your symptoms and then ask searching questions to determine the probable cause of your illness. The difficulty is that different illnesses have this irritating habit of presenting very similar symptoms and it is the Doctor's skill and experience that enables him to determine the underlying cause of your discomfort.

Yesterday, the swine flu hot line was launched. The hot line is manned by people who are not Doctors. They have a series of questions to ask to determine whether you have swine flu. It is an automatic process that cannot possibly replace a Doctor. There is always the possibility that someone with a different illness could be misdiagnosed. It was predicted here and it has already occurred, see here

Lost in Space

Casting around for a book to read at the weekend I came across a book I must have picked up at a fete but I do not remember buying it. It is called ‘Science, Numbers and I’ and it is written by Isaac Asimov. It is not one of his science fiction books but a collection of, to use Mr. Asimov’s own phrase, ‘speculative essays on the known and the unknown.’
I reached Chapter 5, ‘A Matter of Scale’ where he starts by referring to representations of the Solar system designed to give a feel for the relative distances involved. You know the sort of thing, imagine the sun is a football then the earth will be a pea thirty yards away. Well, he does just that but he starts with the sun as a one foot diameter ball in the middle of Central Park, New York. Then he lists all the planets giving their diameter and distance from the sun so that Earth turns out to be 0.110 inches in diameter and positioned 107 feet away from the sun. All very interesting but I have read all this before. The bit I didn’t know, though, was where the closest star, Proxima Centauri, would be on this scale. Before you read on hazard a guess to how far away this representation of the start will be from our one foot diameter sun. It transpires that it will be 5,500 miles away or, with Central Park as the starting point, in Jerusalem. Isn’t that just amazing?

Free Publlicity

An article in today’s Daily Telegraph catches the eye, ‘Adults forget three things a day, research finds’ it states. Immediately one wonders who sponsored this research in order to get some free publicity. Well, according to the Telegraph it was carried out by National-Lottery.co.uk. Yes, apparently a website, rather than a company, carried out the research thereby handily providing a link as well as the free publicity.
Further down the article there is a list of the top 25 things that we forget including, at number 22, buying a lottery ticket. That was a surprise wasn’t it?
The question is how good can this research be? If we are talking about forgetting could it not be the case that the respondents have forgotten the thing they are most likely to forget?

The Tax Man Cometh

I am in the fortunate position of being a landlord. We have just changed the agents that look after the house. As well as signing a contract with the agents they required a lot of extra details. Information like who supplies the gas and electric, which telephone company is used, what is the number of the gas safety certificate was not a surprise. What was a surprise was the requirement that we supply tax reference and national insurance numbers. When we questioned it, we were told that HMRC demands this information from the agents. We can only presume that this is so that they can confirm independently that what I state on my tax return is correct. If they want to go to that trouble they can do the bloomin' tax return for me. Still, it certainly lends weight to this report.

You don't need to worry though because you are not a landlord. Well, perhaps you do according to this.

Compare and Contrast

First read this and then read this. Which scenario do you think is more likely?

Quad Erat Demonstrandum

Steve: I see that the Tories don't approve of giving cohabiting couples the same rights as married couples.

Dave: Is that right?

Steve: Yeah, they also want to make divorce harder.

Dave: Well, that's no bad thing.

Steve: You don't think so?

Dave: No, well divorce is painful and expensive, look at Brian.

Steve: He should never have married her in the first place. He was never home, that's why Sarah started to look elsewhere.

Dave: I suppose they should have lived together.

Steve: The amount of time Brian spent on the road you wouldn't have known that they were living together.

There is a short pause while both reflect on Brian's recent history.

Dave: Steve?

Steve: Yes?

Dave: You approve of cohabiting couples getting the same rights as married ones, yeah?

Steve: Yeah.

Dave: Well how do you know when two people are cohabiting, then?

Steve: They live together.

Dave: Pete and Sandy live together but they aren't cohabiting.

Steve: Given the fact that Sandy is a lesbian everybody knows that they aren't cohabiting.

Dave: So the difference between just living together and cohabiting is whether their friends know that they are cohabiting or not.

Steve: I guess so.

Dave: But what about Mark and that Susan, she started off as a flat mate and they ended up getting married. What if they had just moved into the same bedroom in the same flat? When would they have stopped being flat mates and become a couple?

Steve: Well, they started going out last November.

Dave: Should they have got married rights last November, then?

Steve: Well not until they had been going out for a while.

Dave: So, when then.

Steve: You remember at that Karaoke evening at The Bull when Mark announced the fact that they were engaged?

Dave: Yeah.

Steve: Well, people who want to cohabit should go through a similar sort of announcement so that everybody knows what they intend to do.

Dave: You mean announce your intention in front of a group of peers, friends and relatives.

Steve: Yeah.

Dave: But the authorities don't know that you have done that. They will need to record it somewhere so that everybody can tell from which date the rights begin.

Steve: Well, there could be a person who you went to and told and the rights would start from the date that you told this official person.

Dave: So it would make sense to invite your mates and family along to this telling the official so that it became a sort of celebration of your getting together?

Steve: Yes!

Dave: So, let's put that all together. If cohabiting couples want to get the same rights as married couples then they need to invite a few friends, peers and relatives to a special place where they stand up and tell an official person that they intend to spend the rest of their life as a cohabiting couple.

Steve: That's right! It's a good idea isn't it?

Dave: Steve, you plonker, you have just re-invented marriage!

Tennis and Sex

With Andy Murray's quarter final match against Juan Carlos Ferrero due to be played later today it seems an appropriate time to respond to a question posed by Oranjepan in the comments to a blog I wrote exactly two months ago.
The question that was asked was 'Is it right that Men and women play for equal prize money when men play five sets and women three sets?' The reason that I didn't respond at the time was that although I could argue for and against I hadn't got an answer. This has been bothering me for some time but I believe I have come to a conclusion and so I am now prepared to tackle this thorny issue.
My initial response to this question has always been that is clearly inequitable. The men play more sets and, therefore, should get more prize money. One might be swayed be the argument that since the gentlemen's matches are longer on average, then they should get rewarded proportionally more.
However, a moment's reflection shows that this analysis is too simplistic. Consider going to watch a film, the ticket price is not calculated per minute. To go and see Blood: The Last Vampire costs exactly the same at our local cinema as it does to watch Public Enemies despite the fact that the latter lasts for two hours and twenty minutes which is fifty-one minutes longer than the former.
In addition, one only has to consider how people would react to the suggestion that the winner of the gentlemen's singles is a greater champion that the winner of the ladies' singles because he has played more games. Nobody would find that acceptable. They would argue that they are both the winners of their respective competitions and that it is churlish to say that one is greater that the other. One must conclude that if neither is greater than the other then they should both receive the same prize money. I am now convinced that the current state of affairs is as it should be. There is still one un-answered question, though; Given that they are rewarded with the same prize money, is there any reason why women should not play five sets?

Anyone for Tennis?

Just in case you didn't know I thought that you would be interested in how much the tennis players at Wimbledon are paid. As you can see from the following table it all depends on which round in the tournament they are eliminated.

Winner £850,000
Runner-up £425,000
Semi-Finalist Loser £212,500
Quarter-Finalist Loser £106,250
Fourth Round Loser £53,250
Third Round Loser £29,250
Second Round Loser £17,750
First Round Loser £10,750

So it would seem that Mr Murray is guaranteed at least £106,250.

Update
Make that £212,500.

Blowing in the Wind

Last Wednesday 24th June, Lord Hunt, the energy minister, announced in a press release that 'an extra 25GW of offshore wind energy could be accommodated around the UKs shores.' It goes on to day that 'the findings, a result of the Government's Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) will enable the Crown Estate to proceed with the third round of leasing the UKs waters for offshore wind farms.' In other words the Government is encouraging private enterprise to invest in erecting what is widely quoted as 7,000 wind turbines in the sea around Great Britain.
I am not going to get into a debate about climate change here. What I want to consider is how a Government Minister can talk absolute twaddle and nobody bothers to question what has been said. Between today and the 1st January 2020 there are 3,836 days. If we are going to erect 7,000 wind turbines in that time then we need to erect 1.82 turbines on average every day, including Sundays, in order to get there. If we spend a year sorting out the leases this average goes up to over 2 per day. This is clearly impossible. What astounds me is that if I can perform this elementary calculation why hasn't anybody else? Or have I missed something?

Health Protection

We received a missive from our daughter this morning, not from the school as one might expect, but from the Thames Valley Health Protection Unit which appears to be part of the Health Protection Agency. No, I had never heard of them before either. Anyway, this letter refers to a confirmed case of H1N1 swine flu at my daughter's school and what they intend to do about it. Whilst I have no issue with their approach what did strike me was the slightly odd use of language. For example, the letter informs that they have performed a risk assessment and identified 'a discrete cohort of close contacts'. As far as I can tell the phrase 'discrete cohort' is used by epidemiologists; it certainly isn't part of my everyday language.
Later we learn that these cohorts will be given advice on 'prophylactic antiviral medicine to take as a precautionary/preventative measure'. Quite apart from my dislike of the '/' symbol when the word 'and' or 'or' could just as easily been used, the word prophylactic means preventative thus rendering the sentence tautological.
In the penultimate paragraph we are told that 'anyone with symptoms should self isolate and limit their contact with others.' It is a bit lax on the specifying which symptoms they are referring to but even so 'self isolate' is an awful turn of phrase whereas 'isolate oneself' would have been perfectly acceptable.
In the concluding paragraph, we are reminded that in order to reduce the transmission of all viruses we should use 'good respiratory hand hygiene'. Any suggestions as to what constitutes a 'respiratory hand' is will be gratefully received.
Finally, the letter is signed by a 'Consultant in Health Protection' and no, I have never heard of one of them before either.

Of Cows and Carbon

An absolutely fascinating story here about the Xhosa in Southeast Africa. I heartily recommend getting a cup of tea, sitting comfortably and enjoying a good read.

Apathy

I have felt apathetic over the past week. There is only so much railing and protesting one can do over the EU. In fact the following, which is taken from a blog by Gerald Warner at the onlne version of the Daily Telegraph, pretty well sums up what I am thinking right now:

I don’t know about you, but I am pretty close to breaking point. What is the maximum dosage of Valium that can safely be
taken? The 10-horse race for the Speaker’s chair caused a tsunami of feverish apathy to sweep over the nation. Like the
rest of the country, I find the outcome is something about which I am passionately indifferent.
Professional comedians will be concerned, however, by the competition posed by so many old lags from the slime-green
benches, while affecting a self-deprecatory mien, giving free range to their narcissism, self regard, ambition and
pomposity. John Bercow, while trying to convey the impression he was not speaking from notes, looked like Barack Obama
operating from a malfunctioning auto-cue. Now that he has won he will be able to stop pretending he is a Conservative –
unlike Dave, who will have to keep on pretending indefinitely.
This earth-shattering contest is being proclaimed (by the scoundrels on the slime-green benches) as the renaissance of
the House of Commons. Let us hope that is as untrue as everything else they tell us. A renascent House of Commons would
be the worst possible news for Britain: a decaying, moribund, marginalised Commons would be infinitely preferable. No
other institution has contributed comparably to the country’s decline.
This chamber was brought out of well-deserved obscurity to rubber-stamp the theft of Church lands by Henry VIII, creating
centuries of poverty-stricken criminality. By 1649 the pygmies had grown big enough to murder the King; in 1688 they
brought in a foreign usurper to rule over Britain; thereafter, enclosures of common land were their chief preoccupation.
The latest generation of MPs has faithfully continued the traditions of rapacious self-interest, money-grubbing at public
expense and arbitrary exercise of unreasonable power established by its predecessors.
The new European parliament, which represents all the worst features of Westminster on a much larger scale, will begin
from this year to take over Westminster’s remaining powers. We should close down the gothic slum on the Thames and try
its denizens for treason worse than that committed by anybody hanged at Tyburn. The present state of Britain suggests the
epitaph of Sir Christopher Wren is also an appropriate panegyric for this dead legislature: si monumentum requiris,
circumspice.
As for the tired hype of the Speaker’s election being promoted by the media, you can hear the public response if you
listen to the pulse of the nation behind the pseudo-excitement: Zzzzz…

Not-so Smart Meters

I had a water meter installed last year and a colleague at work has just made the same change, thus the subject of metering arose this morning in conversation. I was surprised that the water companies weren’t using some sort of smart meter but are using meters that require somebody to go and read them every six months. My colleague recalled that he had seen an article that promised smart meters for all. After some searching he located it and discovered that it only covered gas and electricity. What I couldn’t get over were the figures. According to the article, presumably the value came from page 32 of this, the cost will be £9,000,000,000. The savings are reckoned to be £100,000,000. That is a payback period of 90 years!

Who in their right mind would think that that was a good idea?

Where do I Sit in the Political Spectrum?

With increasing age one’s political beliefs settle. I know that the ideal situation for me would be one where people and business are left to get on with it and the government was there as a referee to make sure that it was as fair as it can be by creating rules and regulations. The government would not run schools but set the standards which schools should met. The government would not run a health service but would ensure that all could afford health care that met minimum standards set and policed by the government. The government would concern itself with the defence of the country and consider long term problems which the short-termism of capitalism might miss. An example of this would be ensuring the countries long term ability to create electricity, energy security as it is known. You get the idea. People and business can do what they want within limits and with this freedom comes the obligation of a responsibility to make it all work.
So for whom do I vote to foster this desirable, for me, utopia? Well, I have always thought that the Conservative party was the closest I could get but I have been worried by the Blair-lite attitude of David Cameron. I feel that he is peddling a bland centrist approach that was what the country clearly wanted twelve years ago; I am not sure that this is the case now. I am even more sure that what is being offered doesn’t hold the prospect of the sort of world I would like to see. My concerns about David Cameron are confirmed by a piece written by Gerald Warner in today’s Daily Telegraph, which I would heartily recommend reading. In it he concludes:

I know there are many patriotic, Conservative-inclined voters who flinch from such honest appraisal of Cameron. The vital thing is to get rid of Labour; Cameron is better than Brown; the Tories will come round; life would be more liveable under their rule... Sorry, but that kind of self-deception can only lead to disaster. Three months into a Cameron government, with Britain absorbed into Europe, protests ignored, the same PC tyranny, the same impotence in the face of mass immigration, the whole Blair agenda continuing, such comfort-seekers would recognise their mistake - too late.

The decades-old, arrogant mantra of liberal Tory grandees regarding their betrayed voters - "They have nowhere else to go" - no longer obtains. Dave will be responsible for the dissolution of the historic Tory Party.

Whither my vote now?

Blimey!

We partook of some cup cakes last night and this is part of the box from whence they came. It caused a number of sniggers in our house, I can tell you.

Surely, the people who designed the packaging and the manufacturers must have realised?

Helicopters

What I don't understand is why air ambulances are paid for by charities whilst police helicopters are paid for by the police. Do you think the police would have a helicopter if they had to rely on a charity to run it?

Brussels's Dictates

The European commission is the part of the executive branch of the EU. Amongst other things it is responsible for proposing new legislation. There is one commissioner from each EU member state though they do not represent that state; in fact they are specifically charged with representing the EU as a whole. Our appointee is The Baroness Ashton of Upholland. No, I had never heard of her before either but reading her potted biography here, it is clear that she is a career politician.
Anyway, as reported in Tuesday's Daily Telegraph,

The Commission aims to create three “authorities” with their own staff, full-time president and independent budget. If there is a dispute between regulators from EU countries over how to proceed, these EU bodies can “settle the matter” by binding mediation. The European Court would have final jurisdiction. The wording would appear to reduce Britain’s Financial Services Authority (FSA) to a subservient arm of the EU apparatus, limited to “daily oversight”.

So, there you have the European Union in a nutshell. A bunch of people you never elected have taken advantage of the recent banking crisis and are going to take control of our banking, insurance and securities business. If you think I am being paranoid then look at the following comments. From a previous Daily Telegraph article:

"This is exactly what I feared would happen," said Ruth Lea, director of UK think-tank Global Vision. "The EU is taking advantage of the crisis to extend its control over the British financial system. It is very threatening because it is almost impossible to repeal anything in the EU, however damaging it proves to be."

Further on it the same article we read:

Antonio Borges, chair of the Hedge Funds Standards Board, said the blizzard of EU proposals had been hijacked by political forces and were "out of control".
"There is little intellectual foundation to what they are doing," he said. "You would have thought that since 80pc of Europe's hedge funds are in Britain, and are already regulated, that the FSA would have a big say [on hedge fund proposals], but the FSA was marginalised. The reality is that a great deal of regulatory power is going to Brussels."

But don't worry because Alistair Darling has saved us. As quoted in yesterday's Guardian

Darling said: "The thing that concerned us, which we could not live with, was a proposal whereby there might be an agreement reached by regulators at a European level that would have had domestic fiscal consequences for domestic governments. In other words, they might have been able to say to a government 'you've got to do something about a bank', therefore that government would have had to ask its taxpayers to contribute."

Which has resulted in …

a key pledge that any decisions made would not affect the fiscal responsibilities of nation states.

To put it simply, we cannot do anything about EU control over our banks, our insurance companies and our hedge funds but we have managed to stop them indirectly dictating our government spending.

Isn't wonderful being part of the EU?

Facebook Security

I have a Facebook account like many other people. I wasn't aware how slack the security is on it, though. See this report for how Facebook avoid the issue.

Blog List

I should have added it ages ago but it took my son to remind me. Anyway, I have added a link to http://www.xkcd.com/ because I heartily recommend it. My particular favourites are 21, 138 and 571. To see these just add the number to the end of the URL so you get http://www.xkcd.com/21 for example. After looking at my recommendations just keep pressing the random button.

BBC and Climate Change

I am not convinced that the climate is changing in a way that will result in catastrophic scenarios that are predicted. This is in part because I know about chaotic systems and I know about computer programmes. What I didn't realise was that the BBC does understand these things too.

The Cost of Smoking

"Smoking disease costs NHS £5bn" has been the headline repeated all over the main-stream media for the past couple of days. The report that came to this conclusion was funded by the British Heart Foundation and led by a Dr Steven Allender. Curiously, all the reports I have read state that Dr Allender is a senior researcher at the University of Oxford and that the BHF funded the report. Both of these statements are true but the one fact that is omitted* is that Dr Allender works for the BHF in the BHF funded Health Promotion Research Group. I am not suggesting anything untoward; I am just fascinated that this arrangement is not made explicit.
Anyway, the point of this diatribe is that it may cost £5bn to treat smoking related diseases but the total revenue from raised from tobacco product sales in 2007 was £9.9bn. Since I believe that people should have the freedom to choose to smoke if they so desire then I think the country comes out of it rather well and the reports of this report are remiss in not mentioning the fact that smokers more than pay for their own treatment. Incidentally, some people believe that if nobody smoked we would all live longer and cost the NHS a lot more than £5bn in treating age related diseases.

Dr Allender has a qualification I have not heard of before, to wit a Bachelor Applied Science (Human Movement) from the University of Ballarat.

* Except here

Off-site on shoring

I work in IT as a programmer. It is a job I love but work is becoming scarce and this is in part due to those very clever Indians. I don't have a problem with work being off-shored, moving production to a place where it can be done cheaply with no loss in quality is an obvious business decision and anybody who finds capitalism acceptable cannot argue with that. However, there is another aspect to off-shoring called on-site off-shoring. To give a parochial example, assume that Acme Business Solutions has a need for a team of programmers. Acme Business Solutions contracts Indian Outsourcing Ltd to supply the programmers. The key element of the contract for this example is that Acme Business Solutions insist that all the work is done on their premises due to the confidential nature of the data the programmers will be exposed to. Consequently, Indian Outsourcing Ltd move a team of Indian programmers to Acme's premises. In order for these programmers to work legally in the UK they are issued with what are known as intra-company visas.
So far, so ordinary; I would be surprised if anybody in the IT sector wasn't aware of this happening. What I wasn't aware of until I heard Radio 4's File on Four (website here, transcript here and listen again here) last night, was that intra-company visas should be used where staff have specific company knowledge or distinct skills which were not available in the UK. According to Keith Sharp, marketing director of the National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM*), "Government guidelines are very clear that there can be no cost advantage in bringing in an Indian IT professional on a temporary assignment as opposed to a local contractor." In other words the Indian IT worker should be paid the same as a UK based contractor. According to Ann Swain, head of the Association of Professional Staffing Companies, there are "about 35,000 IT professionals coming into the UK frankly in a market that is not short of IT professionals in the incumbent workforce".
All of which leads one to ask the question "If it is not a cost saving then why are companies doing it?"

* An Indian Chamber of Commerce that serves as an interface to the Indian software and BPO industry.

Words

I like words. Amongst my favourites are cadence, tmesis, mellifluous and boustrophedonic.

Whilst discussing words and books with a colleague at work I mentioned the outline of a book which was recommended to me many years ago but whose title I had forgotten. I did recall, though, that it sounded the same as someone chanting the letters l, m, n, o, p. Entering the search string lmnop on Wikipedia returned a page about the very book I was after namely, Ella Minnow Pea. Even better though is the description at the top of the Wikipedia entry which describes the book as "a progressively lipogrammatic epistolary fable". What a wonderful sentence.

For Whom Should I Vote?

I know it is a bit late in the day but if you haven't voted already and you are not sure who to vote for then you might like to try these websites, votematch and euprofiler. Both sites present you with a list of statements to which you indicate how much you agree or disagree. This is followed by a second section where you say how important you consider the various topics that the statements have covered are to you. At the end they indicate which party your opinions are most closely aligned. A bit of fun that might surprise you. It certainly surprised me.

Connections

Pierre mentioned this. I replied that I thought this was cleverer but in searching for that article I had come across this which mentioned the Leibniz formula. Looking up the Leibniz formula in Wikipedia here led me to discover that it should really be known as the Madhava-Leibniz series and that this is an example of this.
Who would have thought that a chance remark by Pierre would have led me to discover Stigler's law?

A Horse's Tale

I knew most of this story already but I have to admit it still made me laugh out loud.