Sep 2
My iMac is for sale. Here are the specs:
White iMac 17″, Intel Core Duo 1.83 Ghz, 2 GByte Ram, 250 GByte Hard Disk, SuperDrive 8x, Keyboard and Mighty Mouse, Install DVDs.
Comes with Snow Leopard Installed, if you would like you can also have a 20 GByte fire wire drive with a system installer included.
All working. I live in Oxford so really only of interest to peeps in or near Oxford who can pick up.
Here it is with its bits. Please leave a comment or call me on 079 51738517.
Aug 31
Having been ill for well over a week I haven’t done much of anything. But finally on Monday I got the energy to dig up some of our potatoes. Merlyn proudly stood over the potatoes protecting them from the potato thief, but after a while like me he became exhausted and kept watch like a dragon lying on its treasure.
This is after his energetic defence of the Courgette/Marrow.
I grew up and worked in Australia before moving to the UK 13 years ago. Having recently become more actively involved in the UK Green Party I have been following the 2010 Australian election and the performance of the Australian Greens closely.
Because I am looking at Australian Politics from a progressive perspective I will mix the Liberal Party (like the UK Conservatives), the National Party and the Liberal National Party into a single pudding called the LNP.
Up until the last 8 or so years during the gradual rise of the Greens in the Australian Parliament*, Australian Politics had been dominated by 3 parties, the LNP, Labour and the Australian Democrats (AD). The AD always struggled to gain decent electoral success and the most influence they ever gained was to have 9 Senators and often held the balance of power in the Australian Senate**. Like the LibDems in the UK it was often hard to know what the AD stood for. In April 2001 Natasha Stott Despoja became leader of the AD and pulled the AD to the left on social and economic issues, but bitter infighting continued amongst the leadership of the AD and Stott Despoja resigned from the leadership in August 2002. Since then the AD have been in electoral meltdown with their vote collapsing and in 2008 lost the last of their remaining seats in the Senate. In the 2010 election the total vote for the AD in the Senate was 1.3% and the vote in the House of Representatives was 0.2 %. The Australian Greens have completely taken over as Australia’s third party.
In the 2010 election the total first preference Green vote in the House of Representatives*** was 11.4 % and in the Senate the Greens polled from 10% in New South Wales (NSW) to 20% in Tasmania. The Green vote in the two territories ACT and the Northern Territory was also high but didn’t result in the election of any senators because both Territories only send 2 Senators each to the Senate. I believe that the number of Green Party Senators is a fair reflection of their national vote. In the 2010 election 2 of the 5 Green Party Senators were up for reelection and they were returned to office plus the Green Party gained 4 new Senators equalling the best results of the AD in 1999.
In the 2010 election The Australian Greens gained their first seat in the Australian House of Representatives in the seat of Melbourne, but they have also done well in a number of other seats, for example Batman also in Melbourne where they came second, Grayndler in Sydney where the electoral commission needs to do a recount**** of the second preference votes and there is still a slim chance that the Greens will win. The Greens also did well in the Seat of Denison in Tasmania though this is more complicated. The seat was won by a former Green Party candidate standing as an Independent who beat the Green Party candidate by 2% and as a result the the second Preferences of the Green Party candidate flowed to the Independent helping the independent to defeat the sitting Labor Party candidate. The Greens also did well in a number of other inner city seats like the seat of Sydney. Here the Greens were just beaten into 2nd place by the LNP and if the Greens had come second the second preferences by the other parties would have meant that they would have unseated the sitting Labor Party member. Because the Green Party came third and not second the second preferences of those who voted Green went predominantly to the Labor Party making the final Labour winning margin high.
The Preferential Voting System is far from proportional. The Greens received 11.4 % of the vote but have managed to win only 1 seat, a proportional system would have resulted in around 18 seats in the House of Representatives.
I wrote this piece because I wanted to think about the implications of the performance of the Greens in the Australian election and what this means for the Greens in the UK. In the end I don’t think there is a lot that we can learn. But there are a few things.
1. I think the advantage of the Preferential Voting System over First Past the Post is that it makes the support for smaller parties like the Greens more visible. I think that the 11.4 % vote for the Greens still under represents the support for the Australian Greens because some people are confused how the voting system works and still only vote for the main parties because of the fear of wasting their vote. However, I believe that the total vote of 1% for the Greens in the UK 2010 hides badly their real level of support because the first past the post voting system frightens people into voting conservatively.
2. The electoral results in the Australian Senate for the Greens demonstrates the potential for success that the Greens can achieve with a decent electoral system.
3. I think the biggest lesson from Australia relates to the LibDems and the demise of the Australian Democrats. Party members were mostly to the left of their representatives in the Senate and when the membership elected a leader who more accurately reflected their views this resulted in instability at the top level of the party and permanent infighting. The infighting continued after the removal of Stott Despoja and the return of the AD to their usual vague politics turned off the Australian electorate.
4. The Greens in the UK need to do everything they can to show that it is normal to vote Green. They should be highlighting where possible not just Caroline Lucas’ win in Brighton but also the results of the elections for the European Union. This is not deceptive in relation to Westminster elections because the first past the post voting system makes voters who support smaller parties fearful to vote for the party they believe in. But once they understand that voting Green gets results support for the Greens will increase.
5. That for the Greens the Democrats reduce their voice for being heard. The electoral success in Australia for the Greens only blossomed after the AD self destructed. Once that had happened the Greens started to do well. Not just because they picked up former AD supporters but because they stand for decent social democratic policies as well as environmental policies. Their voice as the third party in Australian politics is much clearer than that of the old AD and that their voice in the media is now heard more often because they are the third party. Unlike the AD the Greens I believe will hold and sometimes even exceed the 9 Senators that they have elected because they represent a truly socially left progressive party.
The similarity of outcome between the recent UK and Australian elections is considerable. Neither of the main parties are able to form a Government on their own, the result in both cases makes it slightly easier for the Conservatives to form a Government though I think in Australia the result is more finely balanced than in the UK. The biggest difference is that the Senate in Australia is really going to be hard going for the Conservatives because they don’t control the Senate now and in 10 months time when the new Green Senators are added Labor and the Greens will hold a clear majority. The Conservatives will find negotiating with the Greens much harder going than they did when they had to negotiate with the Australian Democrats to get their legislation through the Senate.
* The Australian Parliament has two chambers, the House of Representatives often called the Lower house and the Senate often called the Upper House.
** The Senate has 76 members 12 for each state and 2 each for the two Territories (NT and ACT). At each election all of the Senators from the NT and ACT are up for reelection and half of the Senators from each state are up for reelection unless there is an Double Dissolution of Parliament triggered by a political crisis. For example the sacking of the Whitlam Government by the Governor General Sir John Kerr in 1975 in which case all Senators are up for reelection. Senators are elected for a fixed term of 6 years which means that the Senators do not take up office until the completion of the term of their predecessors in the Senate. During the first 7 months of the Rudd Government the Senate was controlled by the opposition as the Senators elected in December 2007 did not take up their seats until July 2008. Since each state has the same number of Senators NSW with a population of 7 million is underrepresented whilst Tasmania with a population of 500 thousand is over represented. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Senate
*** The House of Representatives has 150 members and at a General election all members are up for reelection. The party that controls the majority of seats in the House of Representatives forms the Government. Voting uses the preferential voting system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_House_of_Representatives
**** The Preferential Voting system is pretty much the same as the proposed Alternative Vote (AV) system for the UK but different to AV+. The Preferential Voting system in a House of Representatives allows voters to show their first preference thus making it possible to see what kind of electoral support a party like the Greens has unlike the the first past the post system in the UK. However in terms of electoral outcome the Preferential Voting system is still strongly biased in favour of the two major political parties. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting_system
***** The need for the electoral commission to do a recount is because during the count on election night the electoral commission counted the second preferences based on assumption that the contest was between the Liberal and Labor candidates. The recount will not start until Monday.
I recently had to go to the minor injuries unit at the John Radcliffe Hospital. The experience was frustrating and unpleasant and it wasn’t because of the staff who seemed calm, efficient and professional at all times. It is not that the experience was horrible, but bad enough when you are not feeling great, why else would you go to a hospital, and not in the best frame of mind in the first place, pain, worry or concern mean that you will already be rather anxious. None of this excuses visitors to the hospital getting aggro with staff or causing problems but I do think that an environment that is conducive to relaxing patients and visitors whilst waiting would help everybody.
Firstly there is a 2 inch gap between thick panes of glass through which you communicate with the receptionist. This made it very difficult to hear the receptionist, and we had to get them to repeat themselves multiple times and in the end we gave up and guessed at the procedure to follow to be seen by a nurse or doctor. Secondly the chairs are uncomfortable and after waiting for three hour my back was hurting. Thirdly the drink fountain was disconnected and after buying one bottle of water from the vending machine it was impossible to fill it up from the taps in the toilets.
Numerous people clearly could have done with access to a wheelchair rather than having to hop around the waiting area.
Small changes could improve things for patients, visitors and frontline staff but it would take hospital managers to do something about it, perhaps they should be forced to be both patients and frontline staff occasionally with the aim of making life more comfortable for everyone.
Lastly and not relevant to this visit the car parking fees at the hospital are extortionate. We no longer have a car so we took a cab, but I know this from previous experience. The John Radcliffe Hospital serves a large area of Oxfordshire and even getting to the John Radcliffe from some parts of Oxford by public transport is hard. Parking at the hospital should be free or at most a modest amount since for many people there is no other practical way to get to the hospital. I am normally in favour of increasing parking charges to discourage car usage and ownership but I believe that the need to park at the John Radcliffe Hospital is different and that the people who run the car park at the hospital have a captive market and they can ask any price they like.
My letter to the Oxford Times was published this morning. The original letter I sent them was changed slightly so you can read the original below.
The national budget cuts will affect Oxfordshire badly. The public sector job losses will have significant impacts on the private sector as the newly unemployed will have less money to spend and the employed will hoard their earnings whilst they remain fearful of losing their own jobs.
But Oxfordshire County Council and Oxford City Council don’t seem to get it.
The County Council is only looking at cuts as the solution to its budget problems, whilst ignoring new revenue streams. This approach means that front line services like basic road maintenance and programs that support the most vulnerable will have to be cut deeply. Thames Valley police have already made it clear that they are concerned about the impact of the potential budget cuts and a quarter of County Council managers will have to go. I support the Green Party proposals for the introduction of evening and weekend car parking charges in central Oxford, plus charges for parking at the various park and rides around Oxford. These proposals would raise significant revenue that could be used to ameliorate the worst affects of the budget cuts. The County Council has so far ignored these proposals.
The City Council plan for copying the private sector with salary increases for top managers whilst keeping salaries for everyone else low or making staff redundant is madness. This is both morally and economically bankrupt. If we want to support the local community we should be minimizing job losses whilst at the same time making sure those employed on the lowest salaries have enough income to get by. I believe that reducing income inequality is essential throughout the economy and that a reasonably place to start is in the public sector, I was pleased to see that the Green Party have come out clearly in opposing these salary rises for top managers.
Jul 9
A campaigning group focussed on the EU but rather German dominated has been organizing the worst EU Lobby awards for a number of years now. Rather than just dismissing the EU out of hand as we seem to do they are engaging and criticizing. Unfortunately they are not great at setting up a website for their worst EU Lobby campaign, perhaps they do better in German.
I received the following e-mail and thought it would be good to publicize in the UK.
Dear friends,
In 2010 Corporate Europe Observatory, Friends of the Earth Europe, LobbyControl and Spinwatch will present the now infamous Worst EU Lobbying Awards to the public again.
This year we will focus the Awards on the climate and financial crises, since both issues have marked European politics decisively in the years 2009 and 2010. The failure of the Copenhagen talks and the lack of strong reform of the financial markets are a powerful demonstration of the strength of corporate influence through successful lobbying. Therefore, the aim of the Worst EU Lobbying Awards 2010 is to name and shame the worst lobbying against the public interest in both areas.
The online-voting is going to take place from mid-September until end of October. As you have already been involved in previous Awards and might be aware of good cases for nominations, we are seeking your contribution for this new edition.
Starting today until 21 July, you have the opportunity to suggest candidates who have been influencing EU decision making in the areas of climate politics or financial markets in 2009 or 2010 through manipulative, deceptive or other dirty lobby strategies. As you already know, the proposals need to be supported by veritable facts and properly documented. Nominations lacking strong documentation can not be considered.
Nominations with supporting documents and explanations can be submitted online at:
Looking forward to your suggestions!
Find out more about previous Awards on www.worstlobby.eu
—
So if you have any good ideas for appalling lobbying of the EU please send them an e-mail.
Jun 14
When I started this blog I wanted it to be not just about climate change or other serious political stuff, but my obsessions have interfered with that. I do have non-political obsessions like making sure the veggies don’t get taken over by weeds, and you can read more about that at Julieanne’s blog. But even more important, if that is possible is cycling.
My first blog post posted at the beginning of January was about the poor state of my bike frame, and I have never done the followup blog post. I got the frame back a few weeks after that and the bike was put back together with some new parts and you can see it in its lovely new state, painted a lovely British Racing Green instead of the deep red it had been. Julieanne prefers the red.
Doesn’t it look spiffy
I have done over 1,700 miles since I got it back. The reason I am doing the followup blog tonight is because my cycle computer which I got in February 2007 will let me know on the way home from work tomorrow that I have done 10,000 miles on this bike since I got the cycle computer. I know it is just a number, and it doesn’t mean all that much but my previous cycle computer died after 7,000 miles so it is nice to actually see the numbers.
Nearly all my cycling is commuting but I also like to go on cycling breaks.
So I am looking forward to my ride tomorrow and if the weather is nice I might even take the scenic route and come home via Boars Hill.
May 21
This years Atlantic Hurricane season is likely to rival that of 2005.
The mid Atlantic sea surface temperatures are now very warm due to both cyclical factors and global warming, the El Nino is fading meaning that wind shear will lessen. The warm waters provides the fuel for Hurricanes and the lack of wind shear removes the brakes on the development of powerful Hurricanes which will batter the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.
I don’t think anyone knows what the effect of all that oil in the Gulf of Mexico will do to the development of Hurricanes, but a Hurricane passing through is likely to spread the oil which has been hidden below the surface by the use of the dispersants all around the Gulf. Haiti is utterly unprepared for an above average Hurricane season and the results could be devastating for those who were made homeless by the recent earthquake.
You can see just how warm the mid Atlantic is, which is the nursery ground for newly developing Hurricanes below.
In late winter and early spring climate skeptics were claiming that recent evidence suggested that the planet was not warming. The cold winter experienced by the North Eastern US and Western Europe and the recovery of the Arctic sea ice extent seems to have convinced many that warming has come to a halt if it was actually ever warming at all.
Just like me the skeptics will be disappointed to find out that warming has not stopped and the most recent evidence is that the warming is occuring just the way the climate scientists said that it was going to. This has consequences, the mid Atlantic sea surface temperatures are now very warm due to both cyclical factors and global warming, the El Nino is fading meaning that wind shear will lessen. The warm waters and the lack of wind shear will mean that this years Atlantic Hurricane season is likely to rival that of 2005 where Hurricane after Hurricane lined up to batter the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico. The consequences this year could be horrendous because Haiti is completely unprepared and we have no idea what a Hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico will do to all that oil. Read the rest of this entry »
May 19
I’ve finished “Requiem of a Species” by Clive Hamilton and would recommend it. I felt that the end of the book could have had some concrete suggestions in discussing actions and responses after you have come to accept just how much the Planet is going to change.
I went to the book launch in Oxford last week. Clive Hamilton’s introduction didn’t add much for me because I had already read most of the book but the discussion that followed was good. I wanted to ask Clive about what he meant by radicalize democracy but didn’t get a chance. The reason I am interested is because there are people like Lovelock who believe that Democracy is getting in the way of doing something about climate change, but I think it is a lack of real democracy coupled with our unhealthy levels of inequality that are behind our lack of action.
I’m not going to write a book review, because Hot Topic has done a better job than I ever could.
I read Requiem of a Species because of an edited excerpt in the Guardian which I mentioned in a previous post.