School Funding and the Shooting Down of Flight MH17

It has been interesting to view the discussions at Westminster over the appropriate response, and sanctions, in relation to the terrible shooting down of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17, in Ukrainian airspace this last week.

There was clearly a full turnout, with all those present eager to express a view, jumping up and down in their seats to gain the speaker’s attention like veritable jack-in-the-boxes; no need for a quick run around the block to keep their weight under control after a House of Commons lunch then.

Two MPs stood out amongst those selected to contribute; veteran MP for Kensington, Sir Malcolm Rifkind who, obviously aware of the presence of TV cameras, had very carefully co-ordinated his green-rimmed spectacles with a matching tie. How fetching. The other was local MP David Heath. As important and serious as the current situation is, I was left wondering, given his earnest demeanour, why neither he nor any of our other Somerset MPs had felt sufficiently enthusiastic to attend the recent debate on school funding. I have heard all the arguments about timing etc. but a quick look at their respective websites reveals some interesting activity, or lack of it in some cases. Websites and e-mails are, apparently, the regular victims of hackers.  

Despite the modest funding increase, announced last week, which each of our MPs is keen to take some credit for, as a local authority we continue to languish at the bottom of the pile when it comes to central government money. There have been sterling efforts by SCC officers to pull us up by our boot straps and improve educational achievement but our funding levels remain woefully inadequate. As one would expect, this brings with it consequences, and a level of inequity.

In response to initial correspondence I felt duty bound, on behalf of the children of Somerset, to follow this up. To give him his due, although clearly having had all of his buttons pressed, David Heath did respond, not least to rebuke me for my temerity in raising the issue. However, I see that he has an interest in the safeguarding of children, for which he must have credit.

On the one hand we have a small number of schools that for various reasons require additional support to reach the minimum standard of attainment, whilst at the other end of the scale we have a school, recently inspected by OFSTED, where the lead inspector is purported to have said on departure ‘It has been a privilege to lead the team that has inspected this school.’ There could hardly be a greater accolade.   

The link between these two seemingly unconnected debates is, to my mind at least, education.

Whilst sizeable sections of any population remain largely uneducated there will always be those, who through their own power hungry agendas, will try to influence, coerce, and in some cases, force others to do their bidding. This need to exert control over others is more easily achieved where people do not have access to proper education and training that will enable them to weigh up the odds of any situation, to debate and argue it intelligently, coming to their own conclusions and acting accordingly. Surely no civilised person could willingly condone or participate in the killing of innocent civilians going about their business? Or could they?

The world is in a constant state of confrontation, the cost of which is enormous as those sat in their ivory towers safely distance themselves from the action.

In the case of the downing of MH17, it is hardly surprising that each of the two warring factions try to cast the blame on the other, whilst we here at home, view with horror pictures on our TV screens of bodies, and dismembered body parts, someone else’s loved ones, left lying in the heat of the midday sun and then unceremoniously bundled into bin bags; but only after their personal belongings have been ransacked with callous disregard for any sense of decency. Who would wish such an end?

The response, apart from outrage, has so far been rather muted in the west, while no doubt those at the front end of diplomatic negotiations weigh up the political consequences.

One thing we can be sure of is that in the intervening time before independent experts have had the opportunity to inspect the site that there were many opportunities for the rebels to have tampered with the wreckage.

Someone must be held to account, but before we rush to point our fingers in outrage at the occupants of the Kremlin, we must remember the part we have played in past conflicts, and the arms we have supplied to others that have been used to slaughter other innocents. I am reminded of the phrase ’Let he who casts the first stone...’

Assisted Dying

Much was made this week of the fact that an unprecedented number of peers, more than 130 apparently, had registered their intention to take part in the Lord's debate over Lord Falconer's private members bill on legally assisted dying. Although on the surface this may seem impressive, given the average age of those elevated to the dizzy heights of the House of Lords this is hardly surprising; perhaps they should have declared a personal interest before deciding how the rest of us may choose to die.

This is a complex and sensitive topic, and after a debate lasting 10 hours, the bill passed its second reading on Friday without a vote and will now be examined in depth before passing to committee stage. However, Prime Minister David Cameron has said he is not convinced by the arguments for legalising assisted dying, and without government backing, it is unlikely to be debated in the Commons, so will not become law.

There are those that maintain that this bill would mean 'less suffering, not more deaths', and those who are equally vociferous in their opposition to it. Hardly a week goes by without someone clearly in pain, and who feels that they have no quality of life, challenging current legislation in an attempt to exert some level of choice over the time and method of their own death. It somehow seems extraordinary that on a daily basis we all make choices, some legal, some not, over how we wish to conduct our lives, and yet the most important choice of all is denied us.

Dying is an emotive issue, whether or not we are reaching the end of our own lives, or having to witness the painful demise of our own loved ones, but the fact remains that death, for the time being at least, is unavoidable.

There is of course the very valid argument that the proposed change to legislation would facilitate a breeding ground for the vultures that hover over the death beds of relatives, ready to swoop in on the rich pickings. I know this from bitter personal experience, and it is not at all pleasant. Greed can be very destructive, and sadly, family rifts are often the consequence of conflict over the dispersal of possessions and money.

Much of this week's debate rightly centred on the necessary safeguards that must be in place to protect the vulnerable from abuse, and that the final decision must always be made by the patient. The proposed bill requires that two independent doctors agree that the person is mentally competent and is making an informed decision, but I do worry about the ability of others to coerce and persuade.

Under current legislation the wealthy have the opportunity to travel abroad to Switzerland to take their own life, while many others are left in a state of desperation, and suffer a lonely, cruel death, according to lord Falconer. Many people are so worried about the implications for their loved ones, by asking them for help to die, that they end up taking their own lives by hoarding pills.

As a Samaritan, as may be expected, I believe in self-determination but I can appreciate that there are arguments for and against.

There are many examples of occasions when for a period of time, usually due to prolonged ill-health, or where a terminal illness has been diagnosed, when those affected feel that their lives are no longer worth living. On occasion, in desperation, they may attempt to take their own lives. Many do not succeed, neither do they really want to. What they really want is for the pain and the inability to lead the life they once led to cease, which is a different matter altogether. There are equally many, many examples of where those who have gone through this difficult time come to be thankful that they had not succeeded in ending their lives. There are likewise many tales of someone being told that they have only a few weeks to live, and then go on to defy expert medical prognosis, living long and productive lives for sometime after their demise.

Personally, all that I ask is that when my own time comes, whenever it may be, that my demise is swift and pain free, and that I've had the time to say goodbye to loved ones, put my affairs in order, and sip that final glass of champagne. Not too much to ask I hope. We all have different hopes and aspirations, and I for one would not want to deny someone else that choice.

Wht I Don't Like Mondays

Ever since I first became a Hotel & Restaurant Inspector for the AA Hotel & Restaurant Guide, almost 20 years ago, to paraphrase the well known Boomtown Rats song from the 70s, I have hated Mondays. My principle reason for my intense dislike of the first day of the working week, is that so many businesses, having got the weekend over and done with, choose to close on a Monday.

It is virtually impossible, in our so called 24/7 society, to find a restaurant open, a pub that is serving food, to feed my groaning stomach, or a hairdresser or beautician to help me make my appearance look a little better. It seems to me that many small businesses, the type I prefer to shop in, all shut up shop, treating Monday as a ‘non-day’. Admittedly I am hardly a good example of work/life balance, but it is frustrating in the extreme nonetheless when I want to go about my business, and spend my hard earned money in their establishments.

However, gripe over, the real reason that I hate Mondays is that so many organisations have their meetings on a Monday, and frequently all at the same time. With the best will in the world I just cannot be in several different places at once; a classic example of not being able to please all of the people all of the time, despite my constant juggling act to ensure that no-one feels neglected. This often results in me making half of a meeting before dashing off to another one, and in the process completing missing a third if I’m not careful. This last Monday is a case in point. I try to arrange my working life to keep Mondays clear for meetings but I still ended up attending eight in all, going from home to Exeter, to Yeovil, to Taunton to Ilminster, all at a rate of knots. There is of course the argument about being over committed. I do my best before saying ‘yes’ to joining yet another committee, to find out what the time commitment will be. The response is usually ‘Oh, we only meet four times a year...’; that is until sod’s law dictates that each organisation will develop some previously unheard of issue or problem, that involves, yes, more meetings. Perhaps this is one of the reasons, that on the surface at least, when councillors’ expenses are published each year mine seem reassuringly high, but not without having undergone the utmost scrutiny by the office bods responsible for protecting the public purse. I know there are those who choose not to claim at all, but in spending over £100 a week on petrol that is not a luxury I can afford.

There does appear to be a good deal of focus on whether or not one attends meetings, but I would argue that it is more about the quality of the meeting, not how many you hold.

I was truly delighted when described publicly during my tenure as Chair of Somerset Schools’ Forum as being a ‘magnificent chair’, one of the highest compliments I’ve ever been paid. I like to do things well, and in preparation for such an exalted position I had taken formal training to give me a fighting chance of doing a good job. Chairing meetings is a skill, and I’m sad to say that not all committee chairmen have quite mastered the art; to maintain focus, having a tight agenda and sticking to it, whilst allowing those present the opportunity to have their say. For me, more important than the meeting itself, are the outcomes, the decisions taken and the resulting actions, within agreed timescales. I attend numerous meetings where the same items have in some cases been on the agenda for a VERY long time, seemingly without resolution. I fall foul of this on occasion, where I have neither the power nor the responsibility to carry out the task in hand, and were it not for the repercussions, there are many occasions when I’ve felt like taking action myself in an effort to evade the slow wheels of democracy, and its resulting bureaucracy, at work.

I admit that I have now become much more selective about which meetings to attend. If it is a choice between spending my time debating issues with a bunch of other councillors about things that will have little or no impact on the community I represent, or spending time in the community, with the opportunity to really engage with people on a meaningful level, then I always choose the latter.  

The Promise of The School Prom

As the last of the school proms take place for school and college leavers across the county, calling an end to this year’s academic toil, and heralding the start of a long, hot, lazy, summer for most, I was delighted to have witnessed one first hand, albeit from hotel balcony.

The occasion proved to be much more entertaining than anything on television that night, as I observed youngsters in their finest garb, arriving for the event that for many marks the final stage in their formal education.

It won’t be long, as they step out into the real world, that they learn, that just like taking driving lessons, it is only after you’ve been let loose that the real learning begins. University, the destination for most, is another ball game altogether.

The concept of a ‘prom’, short for the French word promenade, seems to have developed, in the UK at least, from the traditional presentation of debutantes, carefully selected young women of pedigree, to the Sovereign. This was the annual event intended to kick start the social season, in the hope of finding a suitable husband. It was of course before many young women of certain distinguished, often titled, families were given the opportunity, or enjoyed the expectation of, continuing their education in quite the same way that exists today. The practice of ‘coming out’ was abolished in 1958.

In my day, quite some time ago I admit, as far as I can recall we didn’t have ‘proms’. The best that might have been on offer would have been an end of term dance or disco of some sort; certainly not the posh sit down affairs in smart hotels and other exclusive venues that seem to be de rigeur nowadays.

The closest I’ve ever been to enjoying this type of function was my first husband’s ‘passing out’ parade, and the subsequent ball, at Dartmouth Naval College, to which I wore a hand crocheted full length white dress. I still have the photo somewhere. For me, one of the joys of involvement with the armed services is the splendour of the environment and the formality that underpins their social functions.    

The USA has for many years embraced the high school prom and keen to follow suit, we have now taken it by storm. If the young adults I saw are anything to go by this is now a firmly established rite of passage.

Not trusting enough to allow their offspring to drive themselves home in the wake of the alcohol consumption that was to follow, they were Chauffeur driven to the door by parents looking as proud as peacocks. Dads had clearly been given the brief to polish the Bentley, complete with personalised number plates, or the open top Porsche or Mercedes, to within an inch of their lives. Joined by a Buick and several vintage VW camper vans, their arrival made something of a spectacle.     

Mums, meanwhile, were standing in the wings, snapping away for all they were worth, eager to capture their little darlings to provide a permanent mark of their entry into adulthood.

 

Dressed up to the nines, there was the odd smattering of tiaras, but thankfully no tantrums, as they mingled in the entrance below where I was seated; they were alternately self-conscious, and bold with the forced bravado of those who were just ‘too cool’ to care. Most of the girls opted for long dresses, often strapless to show off tanned shoulders, and hair carefully coiffeured to give the tousled look, making it appear that they had not spent hours getting ready. Others went for short leg-revealing outfits, clearly demonstrating their readiness to dance the night away, despite the six inch killer heels. One of my favourite outfits was worn by a ‘goth’ girl, all in black, spiky hair, with panda eyes, and wearing a net skirt along with the Doc Maartens to complete outfit; she was clearly not the type to conform, and stood their amongst her class mates, with attitude and in defiant mood. The boys without birds gathered together looking like Danny Zuko and his coterie from Grease, except for being suited and booted; they behaved with a level of nonchalance designed to make it look as if they didn’t mind at all, when clearly they did. For those lucky enough to be in the first throws of teenage love, coupledom was shown by the boys bravely sporting ties to match their girlfriends’ outfits, and hair held firmly in place by an excess of gel.

After witnessing this spectacle, I spent the evening with one young girl, who having stylishly worn a red bow tie to her prom the week before, was still sporting it, every day, as a reminder of the occasion and its significance. For her, her class mates, and for me as a mere bystander, it clearly was an event to remember.

The Internet Is Creating A Two Tier Society

There has naturally been a good deal of interest in the rollout of Superfast Broadband across the county recently. This is being undertaken as part of a joint venture between Somerset and Devon under the umbrella title of 'Connecting Devon & Somerset' (CDS). Aided by considerable, but insufficient, government funding, the remainder of the cost is being largely being funded locally, from an ever diminishing pot, and with the establishment of partner organisations to take up the rest of the slack.
Despite the frustrations of those who are not yet connected, we do have every reason to be proud of the fact that this is the most ambitious project in Europe. There is no doubt about the benefits of being connected, but I believe that this also comes at a cost, and that we are in danger of creating a two-tier society; in a way which we not have perceived as being possible, or as rapdily, even 20 years ago.
I am led to believe that one of the first, and most important, questions asked by businesses thinking of relocating to the area, in addition to those considering a residential move to this desirable neck of the woods, concerns broadband access. It can certainly have an impact on the value of a property, as many of those wanting to up sticks are beginning to find.
In my County Councillor role I frequently field enquiries from local residents, many of whom run businesses from home. They are rightly concerned about the effect that this can have on their ability to perform; meeting expectations that are taken for granted elsewhere in the country.
My own concerns are of a more personal nature. Living in Combe St. Nicholas, it is not unusual for me to be unable to access the internet at all on a regular basis, which is at the very least irritating. Although I like to think I am fairly competent, I have always been technologically resistant.
As we have all become used to the expectation of being contactable 24/7, I find that I resent the increasing demands that this method of communication imposes upon me, often to the exclusion of all else.
Latest statistics from the ONS reveal some interesting facts. In the UK by 2013, 21 million households (83%) had Internet access, with 36 million adults (73%) accessing the Internet every day. This is almost double what it was when such records began in 2006. Likewise, many of us are increasingly using the Internet to purchase goods or services. I worry about the impact of this upon our local shops, as many businesses, finding it more cost effective, choose to go down the online route. Already our high streets are revealing a shift away from the traditional businesses upon which we have built our communities, as the increasing number of empty shop fronts demonstrates all too well.
I was prompted to pen this piece by an alert from the Rural Vulnerability Service, in which the headline news, provided by a study conducted by the Centre for Economics and Business Research, was 'Households without internet access pay an average of £440 more a year for goods and services'. This equates to 4.4% of the average household income.
This in effect means that 17% of households (5.4 million), which are likely to be in the lower income bracket to start with, are being adversely affected by this relentless drive towards 'making' us move over to the Internet. The vast majority of these people are also amongst the poorest 10%, especially when taking into account the high level of older vulnerable groups, particularly within Somerset; not an inconsequential amount when trying to make ends meet.
Somerset is largely rural, and it is rural households in isolated communities that are most likely to lack internet access.
The campaign, which I wholeheartedly support, is calling on service providers to give their customers the choice of receiving their bills and statements on paper at no extra charge.
Households unable to take advantage of lower energy and telecoms tariffs available by switching to online-only services could miss out on a potential annual saving of £139.
Yes, of course I acknowledge that we must embrace change if we are not to be left behind. What price for progress though, where what we have created is a digital divide that will only become greater; where in future our social standing will largely be determined by our ability to access and use the Internet. We are all living longer, so until the young technology whiz kids reach retirement age, the problem is likely to get worse before it gets any better.

Rolf Harris - Guilt By Association

In the wake of the Rolf Harris conviction for sexual abuse this week, it has been interesting to note how quickly the raft of celebrities and politicians, who were happy to endorse him during the height of his fame, have been swift in their condemnation, as they rapidly attempt to distance themselves from him. We have seen comments from the likes of Esther Rantzen, Ronnie Corbett and Cilla Black, where not so long ago they, along with their showbiz colleagues, would seek to bask in the reflected glory of association with someone, who at the time, was deemed to have become a national treasure.
The similarity, in terms of the way in which Rolf was able to ingratiate himself, unfortunately smacks of other celebrities who have recently found themselves in the firing line, as more and more victims gain the confidence to speak out about past incidents of abuse. What we must not forget though, is that it is highly likely that there are many, many more victims who for whatever reason have chosen not to come forward, and who may still be living with the consequences of such actions. It is these individuals who often pluck up the courage to contact organisations like Samaritans, where sometimes many years later they are still struggling to come to terms with what they have suffered, and the extent to which it continues to affect their present day lives.
Apparently Rolf even had the audacity to make a video on how children should avoid child abuse; a clear and sickening example of a deliberate ploy to highlight the very crime he was guilty of, in order to deflect attention from his own insidious actions.
What has surfaced during the trial is that Rolf has long been known to have had a dark side; reportedly coming to light on occasions such as those in which his latest artwork might have been unveiled. His response to criticism of his artistic work revealed a less than genial side to his nature, as the glitterati fawned all over him, jockeying for position and becoming prime suckers in the process.
Inevitably, in the wake of his demise, the topic of much discussion is the fate of his paintings. They seem to have disappeared from public view overnight, as those who once lauded his dubious artisitic talents now wish to hide their embarrassment at having fallen into the trap of paying through the nose for something with little merit. There have been calls for his paintings to be destroyed, but I would argue that that they will quickly gain cult status, and will therefore be quite valuable. Better therefore to auction them off, and the proceeds to go to his victims, or to support those organisations that provide help to victims of abuse. There is precedence for this course of action, as Hitler's paintings were seized and sold off, fetching thousands.
The real worry here is the extent to which such devious, manipulative behaviour is carried out so openly, with a level of arrogance borne out of the knowledge of the protection provided by his cosy celebrity coterie. For most of us, whilst disgusted, there remains a certain level of suspended disbelief, because we are not the habit of mixing in such circles.
Closer to home, let's not kid ourselves; it may not make sensational international headlines but this subservise controlling behaviour is more common than we'd like to believe. We cannot, and should not, wrap our children in cotton wool, because this in itself can pose the danger brought about by naivety. However, we do need to be alert, and refrain from falling for the 'because they are rich, famous or in a powerful positon, they must be OK' scenario.
Coffee morning gossip, overheard just this morning, has focused on Rolf's touchy feely behaviour, and the feelings of many who struggle to believe that his motives could have been anything other than altruistic.
It is unfortunately a common ploy for those wishing to exert influence in an unhealthy way, to position themselves within their communities, to become virtually untouchable. One of the most valuable pieces of information I ever received was from my father-in-law; it's not what you know but who you know. It is incumbent upon all of us to be aware of the motives behind those who seek to ingratiate themselves with us and our families, and for us to be more careful of the company we keep, or entrust our children to. Sadly, the lesson for all of us is that in future it will be that much more difficult to be able to blindly trust those who seek to do good, for we will all be looking for the ulterior motive.

What Are Our MPs Drinking In The House Of Commons

At the time of writing the house ’rose’ this week and will return on 1^st September. The ‘house’ I am referring to is of course the ‘House of Commons’, where our elected MPs go about their daily work on our behalf.

As one might expect, at some point in the day, they do need to seek little refreshment, of either the liquid or more nourishing kind. I took advantage of a recent Freedom of Information request to have a look at what’s on offer. Their own website is not kept up to date so some of the information may be a little out of date, but as with all behemoths I suspect the wheels of power turn slowly so much will still be current.

Those entitled to use the on-site catering facilities (there are others off-site) are the 13,000 pass-holders, which includes Members of both Houses, their staff, House staff, civil servants, contractors’ staff, members of the Press Gallery etc., as well as members of the public and non-pass-holding visitors to Parliament. They have access to 4 table service restaurants, 3 self-service options, and 4 bars/lounges.

Food and drink menus are on a six weekly rotation and change on a daily basis. I’ve never been much of a person for either self-service or buffets myself, much preferring to be waited on hand and foot. So with this in mind, I have confined my observations to the Member’s Dining Room, the Strangers’ Dining Room and the Churchill Grill Room (although the actual menu says ‘Dining Room’).

It is well recorded that in return for all of their tireless toil MPs get to enjoy the benefits of subsidised dining and imbibing. Given the central London location, £17.35 for a fillet steak does seem like a bargain, and I wouldn’t have minded the seared sea bass on chive potato pancakes with roast shallot pureé and tomato dressing. This costs a mere £4.15, if eating in the Members’ Dining Room, but the same dish, I see is £6.90 if eaten in the Strangers’ Dining Room. Perks indeed. There are of course strict rules about who can eat where, and when.

What is interesting though is that from the three restaurant menus I was able to obtain they all offer the same ‘Wine Recommendations’, and at the same prices; so the moral must surely be ‘eat the same food and pay more, drink the same wine and pay the same’. Could this be a deliberate ploy to make our MPs drink more, no matter where they choose to eat?

The two recommendations on offer were:-

Pinot Grigio Boira Organic, Veneto, Italy 12%, 2011, £17 a bottle (£4.70 for 175ml.)

Côte du Rhône, Domaine de l‘Armandine, France, 13.5%, 2009, £15.50 (£3.90 for 175ml.)

They do at least offer the wines in 125ml. sizes, my preferred measure, which is now very difficult to obtain in pubs and restaurants although they are legally required to offer it.

The main wine list, which is fairly lengthy but not extensive, seems to be largely well chosen, with quite a number labelled under the House of Commons brand name, which  makes it difficult to find out who the producer is, but they do provide useful raffle prizes for MPs doing the rounds of village fêtes and fund raisers. 

Aside from the branded wines the champagne on offer is Lenoble Rosé Vintage Brut 2005, at £40.85, which given that it retails for £34.20 is a real bargain. However, I would have hoped that in the Churchill Grill Room at least they would offer Pol Roger, known to be the British Bulldog’s favourite marque.

It may be of interest to readers to note that since the coalition was formed the House of Commons has bought in more than 25,000 bottles of champagne, totalling £275,221. In 2010 champagne purchases totalled 4,691 bottles, rising by 72% to 8,082 in 2013. Clearly they like a drop of the good stuff, as an ardent champagne lover myself it would be hypocritical of me to make adverse comment.

Finally, also on offer is Mâcon-Lugny « Les Genièvres », an excellent Burgundy, from one of the top vineyards in the Mâconnais region. Made from 100% Chardonnay, it is described as opulent, rich, with a flowery bouquet and lovely honey, apple and nutty flavours on the palate, Tony Blair apparently celebrated his election victory with a glass. Available for us mere mortals to buy at Tanners, the 2012 will set you back just £12.70.