Richard Lack's Blog

Democracy and the Blogosphere event

The Adam Smith Institute is hosting an evening seminar on

Democracy and the Blogosphere

with Stephen Pollard, New Labour journalist and broadcaster
William Heath, Chairman of Kable (publishers of Government Computing)
Perry de Havilland, Chief Editor of Samizdata.net and Partner of the Big Blog Company
and Sandy Starr, Spiked Online

on Tuesday 16 November 2004 at 6:15pm for 6:30pm
at the Institute’s offices at 23 Great Smith Street, London SW1
Dress: jacket and tie

If you would like to attend, please e-mail blogevent@adamsmith.org in order to get a place. We have limited space, so it's important to book. The event will be followed by a champagne reception. Click here for a map.

Here's the blurb...

Much hype surrounds the internet's self-publishing phenomenon known as blogging. Many claim that the blogosphere - the community of millions of blogs - is the key to reinvigorating the political process. Some believe that, using blogs, politicians will better serve their constituents, the disaffected will become involved in politics, and public confidence in the ability of government to solve society's problems will skyrocket.

There are also those who fiercely believe that, if only MPs would all start blogging, public debate would be dramatically revitalised. Is this wishful thinking in the age of spin doctors and party whips? Would more conversation with the public encourage our MPs to follow better policies, or lead to governance by opinion poll?

Does the blogosphere really strengthen the political progress, or is it more anti-Establishment than the Establishment would like to believe? Should the unprecedented ability of citizens to spread criticism of the state, its actions and its employees be cause for governmental alarm? Can our political process withstand such scrutiny? And is the blogosphere the big, equality-driving democracy so many claim that it is, or is it really a meritocracy, where the most interesting, compelling, and worthwhile ideas rise to the top?

A new thing I can't live without...Google Desktop search

Losing things drives me mad. Last weekend I lost my car keys for the duration of the afternoon and my life was put on hold. Wouldn't it have been great if I could have pointed Google search at the problem? Up on the white board in the kitchen it would have displayed:

"Searched 11 rooms for car keys in 0.24 seconds. Results: 1 set found including 7 keys: Kitchen floor>by fridge. 3.56pm"

We just got one step closer to this with the launch of Google Desktop search. If you've ever lost a document, or an email or tried to locate the web page from 2 weeks ago for that Cassoulet recipe then this is for you. Put simply - it's a small application (400kb) which installs on your machine and indexes every document, email or web page you've ever viewed. If you need to find an email from 6 months ago from somebody whose name you don't remember that was about 'wedding plans' then just do a search on the Google Desktop browser and the entire contents of your hard drive will be searched in under a second. You'll see a threaded list of all e-mail neatly arranged alongside and web pages or office docs you might have created or been sent.

Simple, neat, usable and stunningly fast. Requires no further explanation here. Now where was that link I downloaded it from?

Hang on a sec........
1 result stored on your computer
Google Desktop Search: 1:52pm http://desktop.google.com/

Ageing Demoghraphic? - My Arse!

The Government would have us believe that the current pension crisis is down to our ageing demographic and that there aren't enough people of working age to support our 'ever ageing population' To say this is to shove your head so far up your own arse as to be completely blind to reality.

When I hear about the crisis affecting 12m workers I wonder why there are only 12m workers in a nation of 60m. What the heck are the other 48m doing?

For the better part they are either a: 'studying' or b: 'claiming'

There are plenty of people of working age among our ranks, but the Government insists on it's policy of encouraging 50% of school leavers to attend higher education, roping off a few million from paying into the system for several years. We now even pay 16 year old schoolkids to carry on attending classes. Classes for what exactly? It seems most graduates don't even have a basic mastery of spelling and grammar on entering employment. If I get one more e-mail from a graduate which fails to differentiate between 'their' and 'there', I'll force them to read an essay to the rest of the company.

Couple the rise of worthless and time-consuming education with the huge growth in benefits claimants over the last 50 years and you have a simple answer to your question. Increasingly our would-be workers are laying not just economically idle, but are chomping away at YOUR pension; well whatever's left after the thieving Chancellor takes a big bite out of your pension to fund Social Equality and lesbian donkey sanctuaries.

Think about it people. If all our young are studying there's nobody to pay for our old. If they are claiming benefits then the few of us remaining in work have to support both Waynetta and Aunty Ethel. Of course Waynetta isn't an unemployment claimant these days. She's a 'victim of long-term incapacity', and she doesn't 'claim' anything - she has 'entitlements'

The pensions time bomb isn't so much about our baby boomers. It's about our couch potatoes.

Having worked hard all your life you have to ask yourself why you should struggle on for another 5 years to fund a course in media studies or an addiction to Tennants Super and Tricia?

Tunbridge Wells parking pinheads

As one who regularly parks at High Brooms station in the mornings, I feel some sympathy for residents in the area who experience difficulty at the expense of us lazy selfish commuters. I live next to a park in Tunbridge Wells and often find it a problem to pull up outside my home. When this happens I remind myself during the two minute stroll back from the car that the park has been there for over a hundred years, and like High Brooms station, it is a public amenity requiring access by car owners. It should not come as a surprise to me that people continue to use something that was there long before I bought my house.

Next time I go house hunting I might prioritise off-road parking, but until then I’m content to share parking spaces on the public roads with other people who have an equal right to be there. Unfortunately Sally Morrow of Clifton Road wishes to resort to resident parking permits to solve her problem. This is a shame because it confers ownership of the public roads on householders who do not own parking spaces. The only winner in this scenario will be the Borough Council who will be able to charge residents indefinitely for something that would have been free to them if only they could learn to be unselfish. Instead of carping at commuters who struggle to pay daily parking at Tunbridge Wells station, why don’t we ask what could be done to extend the station car park at High Brooms, or better still, to remove the miles of double yellow lines which proliferate? While we’re at it – perhaps we should ask ourselves whether we really need that second or even third car outside our house. Perhaps the kids could walk to school? What happens to your resident parking bay when you are out at work for 8 hrs a day?

Tunbridge Wells is a commuter town and should provide adequate parking around its stations for everyone. I frequently drive into London when I can’t find a space around High Brooms – even with the congestion charge I find this cheaper, easier and more convenient. But the sight and smell of another 5,000 polluting cars like mine each morning could be avoided if we all learned to share.

The Plot to Assasinate Michael Moore

Maybe I've been reading Sun Tzu and the Art of War a little too much recently, but it occured to me last week that if the John Kerry is serious about winning the November elections then he should put out a contract to kill Michael Moore.

There - I said it, and you heard it here first. By whacking the Bush Whacker Kerry will be embarking on an elaborate double-bluff which will leave the whole of America thinking that the BushBaby, tired of Moore's stream of fatty bile; decided to terminatify his commie punk ass. Say what you like about Moore - but he's more use to the Donkeys dead than he is alive.

I realise that in writing this I now have the attention of every covert agency and listening post in the Western World as the man who hatched the plot to kill Moore. By way of a disclaimer I need to go on the record and say that while this may very well be my brainchild- this does NOT implicate me in any future conspiracy. However - I can't copyright a great idea and just wanted to record for posterity the encouraging possibility that this might happen.

In other news - I bumped into G.W Bush Snr. on vacation to the island of Lesbos last week. Apparently he's in the area for the Olympics. There he was running along the beach with Hummers and SS Agents in tow and the yacht at anchor. I don't know whether to feel pleased or disgusted that we both chose the same place in the sun this year. But it's a shame we weren't on the cliff path...

Blame the Government for high Petrol prices

In 2003 The UK government took 57.6p in tax on every litre of unleaded (74.2% of the pump price), while companies like Esso and Shell operate on a paper thin margin of just 6%. That's gross margin - not net. To work out how much is in it for them you have to deduct the cost of paying the petrol station, getting the fuel to the UK, additives and credit card charges etc. Let me put it like this - if they ran their business at break even the cost of fuel would still be 78p/l. No wonder they've branched out into selling dead flowers.

This document does a good job of explaining that the UK has the lowest supply price vs. the highest taxes in Europe.

In real terms a barrel of oil (158 litres) cost nearly $60 at the time of the Gulf War and $80 in the 1970's oil crisis. While $40 seems like a lot in absolute terms - the truth is that oil's been insulated very well from inflation over the past few decades meaning that it gets cheaper every year. This has been mercifully reflected in the price at the pump. While 82.9p/litre sounds a lot - petrol is cheaper than ever when adjusted for inflation

This coupled with a general increase in fuel economy has helped to bring down the relative costs of motoring. What the Treasury does using the Fuel Tax Escalator every year is to sneak back the difference between inflation and the inflation proof cost of oil, adding a bit on top for good measure. That formula works well for the Treasury as it causes only negligible pain for the consumer since few of us know how much tax comes out of a litre of petrol. What the taxpayer should be asking is - why isn't petrol getting cheaper? This graph shows very nicely what has happened with world oil prices since 1947. You'll see that there's a lot of volatility but no long term general upward trend as you would expect for other consumables over the same period.

I can illustrate this easily by saying that oil cost $14 a barrel in 1952. If it rose according to the Retail Price Index it would be 22 times more expensive today - a whopping $308 a barrel. If you think that's insane then look at the cost of bread or beer or butter.

One other thing to bear in mind is that Western economies are now far less reliant on oil. The US for example uses only half as much oil per unit of GDP as it did 30 years ago. The share of oil commodity imports in OECD countries shrunk from 13% in the 60's to just 4% in the 90's. This is chiefly due to a move towards service based economies and the effect of efficiency focussed taxation.

I'm not convinced that the global bully petrol companies are acting as any kind of an -opoly. The fact that their prices are broadly the same doesn't evidence the existence of a cartel at all. This isn't price fixing; it's healthy discounting according to local market forces. Filling stations are crucially aware that they need to stay competitive to within 3 or four miles. There are plenty of oil companies besides the big three and nothing to suggest that this industry is any more top-heavy than say supermarkets.

There are 2 main reasons why petrol prices are going up:
1: The Chancellor increases tax and that has to be passed on by law
2: Commodity traders factor in a risk premium for the war and terrorism and increase the price of oil. The oil co's need to pass these increases on to stop them going out of business and maintain profits.

Frankly if you believe that the government has a responsibility to tax people out of their cars with a rate of 400% on vehicle fuel then you have to agree that it has a corresponding responsibility to ignore calls for lower taxes from frustrated motorists like myself.

An alternative argument states that the British motorist contributes £45Bn a year to the Exchequer and receives only £2Bn back in road improvements and extensions. With no viable alternative being found in the joke that is public transport - our average driver is caught between and a rock and a very hard place to get to.

We're all just being silly

A while back the EU Commission began their counter-attack against all our nasty tabloids who'd been making up stories about petty directives emanating from Brussels.

You might recall the headlines regarding Cucumber Curvature Directives and Bendy Banana Legislation. Well the Commission wasn't going to stand for this ridicule any longer and spent time and money issuing FAQ documents with titles like "Europe - The 10 biggest myths" to organisations such as Britain In Europe. They stated categorically that that there was no such thing as banana legislation being drafted and that we're all just being very silly. For a while the battle was beginning to be won and those of us who continued to bleat about excessive bureaucracy started to look a bit reactionary. "Check your facts next time!" was what we'd hear as we droned on about the pointy-headed drones in Brussels.

Funny then, hilarious in fact, that I've just found this document on Defra's own website. EU Directive 1677/88, clearly states that the maximum curvature of a class 1 cucumber must be no more than 10mm for each 10cm of length. In other words - cucumbers, like Italian Ministers, are allowed to be 10% bent. Those of us with a penchant for bananas should be glad to know that we're taken care of under EU Directive 2557/94, ruling that bananas may not be of "excessive curvature"

Surprised? As you splutter into your beer down at the Dog and Duck tonight you might also reflect on the old fallacy that the British pint itself would be outlawed and re-christened '0.57 of a litre'. The original author of the article in the Daily Telegraph, Daniel Hannan MEP received a terse call from an official at the UK Office of the Commission. "Of course it won't be illegal to sell pints" he was told. "Just as long as it isn't called a pint."
Whatever the case for or against Britain moving towards ever closer union, we should all reflect on the utter waste that is involved in drafting a 4 page directive on banana curvature and tranlating it into 25 languages. The mind boggles at the tens of thousands of Euros of taxpayers money being spent on this endless stream of nonsense.

EU Survey from www.yourparty.org

As many of you know, I sit on the interim board of an organisation called Your Party (www.yourparty.org). Your Party's aim is to promote greater democracy and public participation in the political process. To give everyone a real say in the decisions (local, national and international) that affect their lives.

To mark the European elections (on June 10th) we have just launched a survey on Europe : http://www.yougov.com/asp_bespollprojects/ypr/ypr040101009/1.asp

The survey asks the question no-one else seems to be asking : what do YOU want from Europe and the EU ?

I know the EU isn't everyone's favourite topic of conversation but PLEASE don't ignore this. I'm assured by people who've taken the survey that it's both enjoyable and thought-provoking ! And it hardly takes any time - there's a short (1 minute) and a long (3 minutes) version.

It's also important. Everyone will have different views on the EU but, with 70% of new UK law coming from the EU, it affects all of us. There's also a huge debate going on about the future of the EU and Britain's role in it. But how can we decide on the best way forward, on what an appropriate constitution (if any) should look like, if we don't know what kind of Europe we want in the first place? This survey looks to answer that fundamental question.

Once we have the results we're going to lobby the EU and the politicians to address the views expressed in the survey - and the more people who take the survey the stronger our voice will be. So please take it - and please tell your friends and contacts about it by forwarding this survey to them.

Direct Democracy in California - a primer

California has the sixth largest economy in the world and still relies on it's citizens to make up policy as they go along. That's like....totally crazy!

Picture for a moment: Governor Arnold Schwarzenneger sat at the grown-ups' table of the G8 summit with Italy's Berlusconi gesticulating wildly at the impudence of Numero Otto's exclusion from the uber-club of world politics. That's not such a strange thought when you consider that California's GDP is bigger than Italy's.

Say what you like about California. That it's populated in equal part by crazies, hippies and groupies. That its film industry has deflowered our language and depraved our children, or that its 'playful' Governor is an international joke. But don't underestimate this bunch of 35m weirdos with a combined GDP of $1.4 trillion. Theirs is a strip of land that has been a haven for the disenchanted, the oppressed and the hopeful for over 150 years. Ask Californians what their State stands for, and somewhere in their reply you'll hear "Freedom".....or "Dude"

I lived in San Francisco during the late 90's and saw that freedom best expressed in California's Direct Initiatives system. If you think this is unique to California then look again. A total of 10 U.S states now use voter initiatives as a method of partly or completely by-passing the legislature and enabling voter backed 'propositions' to be written into state law. Drive route 101 out of San Francisco at election time and you'll see building sized billboards asking you to "Vote No on prop 77". To the uninitiated this all looks a lot like Government-by-Numbers. I have a picture in my mind's eye of George Bush - tongue out and green crayon at the ready.

California's own system has been in place since 1911 and allows any voter to circulate a petition directly to the electorate for 150 days in all California counties. If the outcome of the petition is intended to revise a state statute then a number of signatures equal to 5% of the turnout of the last Gubernatorial election in each county will suffice. If it involves overturning the Californian constitution then 8% in each county is necessary to get to the next stage of random signature verification and a ballot by voters.

Critics of the system point to its vulnerability as a stalking horse for special interest groups and lobbying organisations. I'd say that depends on your definition of a special interest group. Lately the term has been hijacked by the establishment and taken to mean anybody who disagrees with them. Certainly it's normal for any group of aggrieved people to form themselves into a group before taking action - isn't the rest up to democracy? Were the suffragettes a 'lobby'? Did Luther-King start a 'special interest group'? I don't think these labels forward the debate. What we're talking about here are just plain issues. There are always lobbies on both sides of the ballot paper. A reading of proposition 22 passed in 2000 and outlawing the recognition of gay marriage suggests that despite a huge gay population in liberal San Francisco - the rest of California is yet to be persuaded, even in the face of an organised, solvent and formidable 'pink lobby'. Last month saw the Supreme Court come down on the side of the people who helped enact this Statute when it ordered a defiant San Francisco Mayor, Gavin Newsom to revoke thousands of unlawful marriage licenses.

With more than 1,100 propositions that made the cut over the years, the now almost legendary Proposition 13 in 1978 leads them all. Some say it heralded in the Reagan era of lower taxes and less government. Don't ya'll be forgetting now that Reagan, also an ex film star with a populist knack was Governor of the Golden State in the 1970's. Few expected proposition 13 to survive in the wake of two previous failed attempts. But by 1978 the time was right with high inflation, and property taxes running at 30% of home values. Some families were forced to sell their homes to fill Sacramento's coffers and were moving out of state. Proposition 13 was passed by a two-thirds majority and slashed property taxes by 30% while imposing restrictions on annual rises, which survive to this day, and triggering a nationwide tax revolt that unseated Jimmy Carter. Family friendly taxes brought Californians a second gold rush throughout the 80's and made them the envy of all America.

The electorate's wish for change isn't just reflected in an admittedly "I've got mine and you ain't gonna get none!" message to the tax man. The list of propositions includes everything from the repeal of liquor prohibition (passed 64%), abolition of the death penalty (failed), the end of positive discrimination by the state (passed 54%), limits to congressional terms (passed 52.93%), increased sentencing for repeat offenders (passed 72%) and before and after school programs (passed 56.7%). Take a look here for the full list and a brief history lesson.

It's true that the ability of normal Californians to keep State Government in check is a source of frustration, even for Governors as popular in the public imagination as 'Ahhnuld'. The People Who Know Best tell us that it's vital for Schwarzenegger to impose restrictions on this costly and pesky direct initiative system if he's going to repair the Golden State. The truth is that direct initiative propositions aren't part of the problem - they have become part of the solution. Arnie recently won proposition 57, authorising him to issue a $15bn debt bond which he described as "clearing the state's credit card debts". He did this by parcelling it alongside the more palatable proposition 58, which obliges... politicians to balance state budgets in the future. How novel. Early signs are that California is now coming out of the flat spin that it's been in since 2001. It's leading the way in America's recovery and is proof positive that direct democracy can deliver results - and commonsense policy, with the people telling their Governor- "Hey Big Guy. We'll bail you out....ONCE!
If you could start a proposition today that would be signed by 5% of the turnout in each of your local electoral wards - what would it be? Abolition of wheelie bins? Cuts in council tax? Removal of speed humps?
It's your choice ...and it starts here.

Abusive Parking Wardens - Tunbridge Wells

Dear Sir/Madam,

Further to my phone conversation with the parking controller this morning I am making a written complaint regarding an incident which occurred at 10:55am on Wednesday 5th May at the junction of London Rd and Tunbridge Wells Old High Street outside Crown Appliances.

I had parked my vehicle on the kerb for 5 minutes whilst intending to load a newly purchased vacuum cleaner into the car. It is my understanding that it is legal to park in such a manner, provided it is safe to do so and that other vehicles are not inconvenienced. In this instance it was the only safe or convenient place to park my vehicle and did not in my opinion interfere with the flow of traffic turning into the High Street.

Having walked into the shop I glanced out and saw TW108 stood at my vehicle and making notes. I made clear to him that I was simply loading my vehicle and would be on my way. He replied that the car was illegally parked and that I could have done a better job parking.

At this stage I stepped back into my vehicle and politely offered to move it. As I closed the door of my vehicle TW108 was heard to say: "I don't give a shit if someone comes round that corner and smashes up your fucking car". Taken aback - I asked TW108 to repeat what he had said - thinking that I might be mistaken. He repeated the above words verbatim at which point I took his badge number and made clear to him that I would not tolerate being spoken to in this manner.

I would be grateful if you could explain this incident to me and reprimand the staff member concerned. I can think of no reason on earth why I should be subject to verbal abuse by a public servant - especially considering that I had cooperated with the gentleman and not raised my voice or provoked him into this outburst.

Kind Regards

EU Constitution

Below is my response to a blog on www.reengage.org about the necessity for a referendum on the EU Constitution, and www.yourparty.org's views on the matter:

Seb,

You make some very valid comments. It's certainly true to say that polls can be misleading, and for as long as there have been polling companies there have been political parties that pick and choose those which they percieve to support them in their aims due to the demographic they are composed of.

YourParty have long been aware that there is a crucial difference between a poll and a vote. Polls tend not to be taken as seriously as votes and have a lower burden of accountability. They are useful for putting together a quick snapshot of opinion but they cannot be relied upon for policy forming for a variety of reason. They'll have their place on the www.yourparty.org site but will have nothing to do with formal voting.

YourParty.org will rely on a carefully audited voting system for all areas of policy formation and will make sure that all votes happen in the light of an informed and impartial debate about the issues at stake. It's the nature of voting that many people will come to the argument with pre-conceieved idea formed through the media and what they might have heard down the pub for instance. It's our aim to fill in the gaps in understanding and make sure that members are well informed when they eventually come to take a formal vote on this or any other issue.

What I'm trying to underline here is that YourParty.org won't be letting it's members make up policy through a series of 'quick polls' If you go to the site today you'll see that there's no option to take polls at all for this very reason. The majority of work our technical team is doing right now is in designing deliberative policy formation tools to make sure all future votes are properly framed. This takes time and effort but we're determined to get it right rather than fudging it with polls.

I take your point about an internet group manipulating and taking advantage of our polls, and also your mention of our members being 'relatively affluent technologically literate'. A few points worth noting here:

1: In order to vote we require a valid photo ID. More than is required for postal votes.
2: The internet is now being used by well over half of UK citizens. Perhaps more than turned out to vote at the last general election.
3: It's not true to say that they are mainly young or affluent any longer. 'Silver surfers' number in the millions and many of them are members of the party. Anecdotally - the first press interview Dan Thompson gave on launch day after the Today programme was for an over 50's site (http://www.50connect.co.uk/)
4: The web works for us right now because the costs associated are relatively low. As we grow in size we fully intend to support other methods of participation such as phone, post and local meetings.
5: You could argue that the turnout for the last general election was not refelective of the UK as a whole. It being disproportionately older people who had time on their hands to go out and vote, and with less than representative turnout among ethinic minorities.

Finally - I've done some research on the Eurobarmoter poll and have to admit I can't find the full results. I'd be interested to see how many voted for the constitution if 51% voted yes and presumably a fair percentage said 'dunno'

In any case - we haven't yet polled our members on the EU constitution or started the process of voting and policy formation. Until then I don't have confidence in any polling organisation particularly except for general illustration of the need for a referendum in the first instance.

Things to cross off the list

It occured to me today that there are 2 things that I really ought to have done when I had a chance.



1: Lunch at the top of the World Trade Centre

2: Take Concorde to NYC



Proof positive that sometimes you should just blow the expense and do it anyway. It doesn't look like there's much prospect of anything along the lines of concorde going into production for a very long time. The avionics industry is going backwards for the first time ever.



It's sad to see the end of the irrationally exuberant and optimistic era of our history when we'd build passenger planes that flew at twice the speed of sound, buildings that reached the clouds and lunar craft that touched down on the dark side of the moon. When did we stop striving?

Clamping

I had a brainwave as I left the car for 5 mins at Tunbridge Wells station this morning, not knowing if the clamping van would get to it before I could grab a pint of milk.



It works like this:



The reason that private companies and individuals are able to clamp you, charge you for release, tow your car away and potentially even sell it is because they displayed a prominent notice in the vicinity of the area where you parked. This notice tells you that by parking there you consent to paying a fine and having your vehicle clamped. It's perfectly legal for them to do this and your don't have a leg to stand on in the majority of cases because you've given your implied consent to be being clamped. Under civil law you are subject to the terms of the agreement.



In similar fashion, I've just put a notice on both my cars worded:



"Any person clamping, removing or issuing a penalty ticket on this vehicle consents to being charged by the owner the sum of £100 or an amount equal to all penalty fees, whichever is the greater amount. You also consent to having any clamping equipment forcibly removed and impounded until a release fee of £70 is paid. Storage will be charged at £15 daily."



Anyone care to suggest how that would stand up to closer legal scutiny? I'm off to buy some bolt cutters!!

Weasel Words

I came across an interesting quote this morning:



" ...'social' is a weasel word that has acquired the power to empty the nouns it qualifies of their meanings"



F.A Hayek 'Our Poisoned Language, The Fatal Conceit



...and it's true, put social in front of any verb and it becomes meaningless:



Social Justice

Social Equality

Social Housing

Social Worker

www.Britainineurope.org.uk - A rebuttal

The following post does not represent the views of www.yourparty.org:

What's the case for Briain joining the Euro? ...and my very pointed response to www.britainineurope.org.uk





Let me answer the points this site makes one at a time:



1: Britain Can't afford to go it alone. Half of our exports are to Europe.



Rubbish. We can still stay in Europe and not adopt the euro - This line that's trotted out by europhiles suggesting that a rejection of single currency is a rejection of Europe period is a falsehood. The nature of imports and exports is that it's a two way street. They NEED us more than we need them. If the argument is about free trade then we should renegotiate our terms of entry to get rid of the hugely expensive CAP along with the host of other unfair and uncompetitive taxes, tarrifs and directives which are increasing the cost of employment, keeping French and German farmers' pockets lined and destututing third world economies when we dump our subsidised produce on the market.. Norway and Switzerland have the highest GDP per capita in the world ($39,000) and they are not single market members. They get all the benefits that we enjoy and none of the baggage through membership of EFTA, the WTO and many other free trade agreements. The European Union was supposed to be about free trade - so far it hasn't come up with the goods and instead has been about political union. Put simply - you don't have to be part of Federal Europe just to trade with it. Inside Europe we are not even allowed to negotiate outside trade agreements on our own behalf. The EC does it for us!



2: The quotes from Thatcher are hopelessly out of context and not refelective of her feelings toward Europe. She wants out immediately and renegotiation to follow. Read 'Statecraft' for the fuller picture and a scathing indictment of the European project..



3: In response to the quote: “I can only confirm that the EU is not a ‘super-state’. Neither shall the EU become a ‘super-state’.” By Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, Prime Minister of Denmark, 5 October 2000



I give you this:



Hans Teitmeyer - President of the Bundesbank: "The European Currency will lead to member nations transferring their soveriegnty"



Wim Duisenberg - President of the European Central Bank - The process of monetary union goes hand in hand with political, integration, and ultimately political union



Romano Prodi - President of the EC "The Euro was a decision that completely changed the nature of the nation states. The pillars of the nation state are the sword and currency and we changed that....the real goal is to draw on the single currency and create a political Europe. A common European Army is the next logical step.



I've got pages of quotes just like these. Anyone want me to go on?



4: I won't even justify the wild assertion that 3.5mm jobs are at stake if we don't accept the euro. This figure is plucked out of nowhere. Do you seriously think that a UK firm that currently does it's business in sterling with a french firm will be sent out of business just because we continue with the status-quo? Trading in a different currency never seemed to hurt our very healthy balance of trade between US/UK, UK/Mexico UK/Japan etc etc.



5: Being out of the Euro makes our currency volatile!

Does it really now? Why is then that the major cause of volatilty in the last 15 years was when we got involved in the Exchange rate mechanism (ERM) - limiting our ability to be able to control our currency and sending the pound into a flat spin becuase the Germans had completely different economic circumstances and huge public bills to pay following reunification. We lost the struggle with the Bundesbank on that occasion and we'll lose control again to the ECB if we join the Euro.



6: Interest rates are lower in Europe...

Yes but unemployment runs at 11.5%!!!!! Low Interest rates are great for mortgage payers but they are very unnatractive for investors. ...and yes - that includes foreign companies looking to invest in Britain. In fact interest rates are so low in Germany right now that they risk deflation. Is that a risk we are prepared to take when we hand over all monetary control to the ECB?





7: ....and best of all: Our European partners are even more imprtant since September 11.



Name me just ONE issue that the UK agreed with our EU 'partners' on since 9/11. They showed us that they have no interest in working alongside us or the US and would do their utmost to obfusticate and deride all joint UK/US initiatives. Blair ,has now been forced to go cap-in-hand to Chirac to build bridges.



I could go on - ......I guess mine'll be a "No" vote then

Senseless Marketing Speak

Ever visit a website and completely fail to understand what the company actually does? Or perhaps looked at someone's profile and thought "Hmmmm creative e-enablement strategies and new paradigm digital collaborative solutions provider. Gee - I don't know what one of those is but I feel certain it's just what I need right now."



Believe it or not I came a cross an Ecademist profile today for a life coach that described himself as a "Situational Leadership Guru". Not only is that patently a load of crap, but doesn't it strike you as just ever so slightly immodest. Do you think his wife knows he's a Guru?



When did we dissapear so far up our own 'faecal supply chain repositories' that we forgot to tell potential customers, or the just plain inquisitive what it is we actually do all day? I spend so much of my working life picking apart vacuous marketing speak that I have little time left to do anything else.



I think there's a valid business model here for an anti-marketing consultancy (if that's not more jargon) for corporates who've had their web presence and marketing literature completely loused up by creative copyrighter types. I could charge billions to put together the next generation of blue chip sites that cut to the chase and actually informed clients.



e.g. a website for a lifecoach would be thus:



Who am I?

A really nice guy .....at home in my underpants who once spent a year in Goa smoking dope



What do I do?

I charge you to talk to me.



What are the benefits?

You're supposed to become enlightened...or something



How does it work?

It's a lot like seeing a shrink - but without the stigma or any of the qualifications.

Council tax rises: An open letter

I'm totally hacked off at the extortionate rise in council taxes when all I see in goverment is waste and bureaucracy. For any of you that share my concern here's a letter to my local paper, in response to our councillors assertion that pensioners should be exempt from the rise:





Letters

The Kent and Sussex Courier

Longfield Road

Tunbridge Wells

TN2 3HL



Sir,



Messrs Worrall and Bruce-Lockhart miss the point entirely in defending the borough council’s 134,000 pensioners against a council tax increase running at 4 ½ times UK inflation.



I am saddened at the thought of our elderly stumping up this ridiculous sum. Nevertheless, it’s no more true to say that pensioners are all impoverished than it is to say that twenty-somethings are all rolling in it. To make such assumptions smacks in the extreme of discrimination. Our borough has more than its fair share of wealthy pensioners who sit on a seven figure store of value thanks to another kind of inflation - in house prices. While there are undoubtedly many old folk doing their best to stretch a meagre state pension, there are others who benefit from generous final salary schemes. What then of the young doctor who bears the burden of an onerous student loan, or the 20 year old legal secretary who took a pay cut this year and who annually parts with £2,500 for a season ticket not worth twopence? What will you allow for those of us with young families, or we newly-weds who must scrimp and save and eat baked beans for a house deposit? The twin evils Hardship and Poverty visit us throughout our lifetimes.



Yes pensioners should be safeguarded from the effects of profligate government spending, and so must the rest of us. Messrs Worrall and Bruce Lockhart often and all too easily pass the buck, crowing loudly about central government’s misappropriation of funds to other regions. But it is plain to see that huge economies can and must be made in local government. On presenting hard working people with a rise 4.5 times that of inflation we would like clarification that you have explored every available cost saving measure, including, but not limited to:



· Downsizing the considerable army of council staff and officials

· Stopping ploughing millions into perfectly serviceable parks

· Resisting the urge to spend another £100,000,000 on speed bumps, bus lanes or cycle paths



It is clear that our borough is at crisis point and cannot afford these things. So Messrs Worrall and Bruce-Lockhart, you’ll just have to be patient like the rest of us! Come to think of it - you might have to wait for your council tax this year. You see we’ve had the funds misappropriated towards resources elsewhere.



Yours faithfully,



Richard Lack

If it please your Honour...?

Today is a celebration of that dissapearing species, a man described in most of the papers this morning as a 'British Boffin'



I've been part of the campaign for 6 years to get Tim Berners-Lee knighted. He's an extraordinary man; who besides inventing the web and making this blog possible, has been odd among the digerati in never seeking to profit from his invention. Tim didn't file patents, incorporate start-ups or license the technology of http and html to the NASDAQ luminaries. Were it not for Tim's philanthropic vision of shared learning the world would be a very different place. It's a tribute to him that he never climbed inside the bubble which would burst so spectacularly 8 years later.



A knighthood for a man such as this, or Martin Evans, the brilliant stem cell pioneer - means so much more to me than the myriad honours doled out to the assorted showbiz has-beens for Services to Entertainment (...and Never Getting Caught Doing Coke in the Service of Panto).



Though I think it's fantastic that the Rugger team got a boot in on the honours...and still no rumours of spit roasting; I can't help feeling it premature, impatient even. They are somehow less formidable on the pitch for all their medals. I imagine Jason Robertson breaking into a fast pelt down the wing and legions of Aussie backs genuflecting and declaring sarcastically: "After you Mi' Lord"



The honours used to inspire us by lifting up the people the Establishment wanted us to become. Lately the emphasis has changed such that it's a way for Tony to show our Monarch that we'll choose our own heroes. Lollipop ladies and Milkmen. People that are demonstrably straight kind of guys. I think this often misses the point of the excercise and does a disservice to those that have bothered to go out and acheive real and inspirational greatness.

Congestion Charging: Open letter to Capita and TfL

I'm sick and tired of getting Congestion charging fines because I forget to pay. There's no reason why this should happen using a bit of technology and some commonsense. Here's my letter to the powers that be. If you feel the same way then write in too:



Mr Richard Lack

XXXXXXXXXX Road

Tunbridge Wells

TN1 XXX



cc: Paul Pindar, Chief Executive, Capita

Peter Hendy, Director of Surface Transport, TfL



2nd January 2004



AUTOMATED PAYMENTS FROM DEBIT CARDS



Dear Sir/Madam,



I have canvassed support from very many people who regularly use the congestion zone. Our experience would be immeasurably easier if we had the option for our debit cards to be charged automatically whenever entering the zone. I understand that Capita currently offer the facility to buy a monthly ticket and then to claim a refund at the end of this period. Unfortunately, for those of us who are aware of it, this method is time consuming and expensive.



Many of us have paid out over £500 in fines since charging began. We accept that this is due to the fact that we occasionally forget to pay; but Capita should concede that it is precisely the absence of a method for automatic payment that results in normal people like ourselves being penalised unfairly and needlessly.



Given the technology currently being employed for payment by a variety of methods we are certain that a small change to the system will accommodate motorists who forget to pay by crosschecking a list of drivers who have previously authorised automatic payments against your daily list of outstanding unpaid vehicle registrations.



On a more cynical note I am prepared to contemplate that it serves Capita very well indeed if they fail to act on this straightforward matter. The revenues generated in fines are considerable, and largely dependent on drivers like us forgetting to pay.



We are all mindful that congestion charging is a public service and should be operated as such. It is not in the public service to be collecting fines where you could otherwise be collecting the lesser amount of the congestion charge by prior consent of the motorist.



The cause of the motorist has become a popular one with most of the national papers in recent years. Witness for instance the climb-down on ‘safety’ cameras and speed humps. We believe that most of the revenue which Capita receives is from fines and that the vast majority of those fines are from plain forgetful drivers. A workable suggestion has now been made for you to provide us with a better service. Unless you are able to offer an adequate justification for failing to rectify the situation within 14 days I will campaign in the national press for our proposal to be put into place; with all of the research into contractual agreements and adverse publicity and that this may confer.





Yours sincerely







Richard Lack

Beat the school run

As I drove my personal pollution solution to work today I became frustrated by the well-to-do kids being panzered 400 yards to prep school by Mummy. If I leave the house after 7:45am it's almost impossible to get across Tunbridge Wells in less than half an hour.



Confronted by the grille of yet another X5 skewed across a junction in my path, an idea hit me. It did so with such force that I swear I heard the "swooook doing!" of an arrow embedding itself in my bonce.



Why don't we equip all mothers with kids of school-going age with a medieval trebuchet? You know - the catapault contraptions that besieging armies used to hurl rotting mutton carcasses into castles.



At 8am every morning we'd all carefully seat Isobelle and Lawrence askance the taught sling arm and give the wooden lever a solid tug. For 20 seconds the skies over Tunbridge Wells would rain with pigtails, lunchboxes and mittens; then voila! As the whistle blew in the playground our little treasures would hopefully land somewhere in the environs of the tennis courts, paw themselves for broken limbs, and limp along to lessons.

Audacity of my bank

I got a call from Lloyds TSB customer service a few weeks back while I was in a meeting.



It went something like this:



Lloyds: "Hello Mr Lack. I notice that you have a mortgage with another provider"

Me; "I'm sorry. How do you know that and why is it any of your business in the first place?"

Lloyds: "Periodically we check your account activity in order that we can review your needs"

Me: "So you read through my bank statements"

Lloyds: "Well....errr....we DO periodically review your status as part of our ongoing customer service committments so that we can evaluate your needs"

Me: "My NEEDS are for you to mind you own business and look after my money. I'll thank you not to look through my bank statements"

Lloyds: "You were informed that we would do this when you opened your account"

Me: " That was 10 years ago and I don''t recall doing any such thing. I'm registered with the telephone, email and postal preference schemes. Why are you calling me on a prohibited number?"

Lloyds: "Can I interest you in arranging a meeting with your account manager?"

Me: "I am ending this call"



I later complained to the Head of Data Protection at Lloyds TSB that this was a gross misuse of my personal information. He apologised profusely by post within 48 hours and credited my account with £50.

www.YourParty.org

YourParty.org has been in the news a bit this week. It was set up by Dan Thompson and Rod McLaren, of 365 and Simon Morris, ex MD of of Ginger Productions.





I got involved in setting up www.yourparty.org because I was tired of electing a government every 5 years and then watching them refuse referendums, break manifesto promises and vote against the wishes of their party and their electorate. There are plenty of discussion groups about e-democracy - but we thought we'd take things a few steps further and set up a real political party with real candidates!



YourParty offers members the chance to shape policy by voting on the things that really matter in their lives. Once our members vote on these polcies then our MP's are constitutionally bound to vote in line with them. We are growing incredibly fast and are looking for volunteers among ecademy members.



Check out the site and let us know if you can help. We meet every monday at Smiths bar in Smithfield at 7pm. See you there!

People are our company's most valuable asset!

I've just read another one of those studies reporting that men are being paid 20% more than women in the workplace.



I'm not sure where I'm heading with this but I'm struck by the blindingly obvious fact that market forces are at work here. You as an employee are a commodity and have a responsibility to maintain your own fair market value in the workplace.



Where employers are concerned it's often the wheel that squeaks first that gets seen to. Has it occured to anyone that men just do a much better job at asking for a rise and making sure they don't become undervalued? I'm convinced that there's no hidden agenda in the minds of most employers. Sometimes I've noticed that the business development guys who ask for rises really are the top producers. It's that same skill that they use when negotiating with prospects. I've never yet been asked by a female employee for a rise and that makes me wonder how hard a deal she's able to drive elsewhere. Until I'm asked I'll continue to pay what I consider to be a *fair* wage - and no - that's maybe not the same as the guy across the hall.



Think I'm playing dirty? It's probably not the most inclusive or egalitarian practice but it IS reality and reality bites when you have to balance the books.



Next time you find out your male counterpart gets paid more than you. Consider that he may not be the better employee but he might very well be the better negotiator.

Help for school project

Hi all,



I got asked by a 16 year old student at a secondary school in scotland for help on her project. I found 10 mins in my day to help out quickly. Anyone else care to pitch in? I think she got hold on my e-mail address through our website







-----Original Message-----

From: stewae8 [mailto:stewae8@duncanrig.s-lanark.sch.uk]

Sent: 04 April 2003 14:07

To: Richard Lack

Subject: encryption





I am doing an assessment for a subject I have choosen called Information

Systems. I have been asked to answer the question : How is encryption is

linked to the Internet?



Please send me a reply whenever possible.



Yours faithfully

Emma Stewart



____________



Emma,



I'm very busy right now but here's a brief answer for you:



Encryption is a way of getting round one of the biggest problems of the internet: Security.



Imagine if you sent me a letter by post and it got to my end and I could see that somebody had torn open the envelope and peeked inside. I'd know that the postman, or my wife , or perhaps somebody else I didn't know had looked at it and read the private contents of that letter. I'd be really concerned about that and I'd want to know who'd been reading my post! In the old days this used to happen a lot and so people put red-wax seals over letters to make sure that nobody could open them without the recipient knowing..



Before encryption we had the same problem on the internet - except if you sent me an e-mail it wasn't the post office that was responsible for it. I'd be happy if they DID deliver e-mail for us because I TRUST the Post Office. Instead - your e-mail is delivered by tens of thousands of different internet service providers (ISP's). You have no idea who owns these ISP's and whether you trust them or not. Some of them are quite easy to break into and steal from. If someone takes a sneak-peak at your e-mail it would arrive in your inbox and there would be no way for you to know if it had been opened and by whom. There's no such thing as a rip or a tear in an e-mail. What makes things worse is that in most countries the government has the ability to read our e-mail by placing special equipment next to the computers that deliver our e-mails in the ISP's building. Some countries (e.g. UK and America) only do this for suspicious e-mail that they think might have come from terrorists. Other countries (e.g. China) have a policy of monitoring all e-mail going in an out of that country.



Encryption was developed by a couple of guys that went on to found a massive company called RSA Security. Here's how it works:



When you send me an encrypted e-mail it's scrambled up using a special code (called the key). There are two types of encryption key - 128bit and 256bit. Both types of code are so tough to crack that it would take even the most powerful computer many thousands of years to work out. The only other person that can come up with the code is the one whoI am sending the e-mail to. It's a bit like sending a padlock to somebody by post. The only person who can unlock the padlock is the person who you are sending it to at the other end because you gave them the same key that you have.





One final word:



Encryption is a good thing and a bad thing. It allows me to do things like pay for things securely on websites. I can send my friends and work colleagues private files and not worry about them being read. On the other hand it also allows criminals and terrorists to talk to each other without being found out by the police and the government. That's why some countries (e.g. America) have outlawed the use of encryption technology for e-mail)





So - it's all about Security and Trust. Whenever you try to solve problems involving security and trust you also have to think about privacy. Are my e-mails private? Should the government be able to read them?





I hope this helps Emma.

Please enter your 16 digit alphanumeric account number....

Ever been asked by the invariably Scottish or Welsh customer services operator for your excessively long account number before they'll let you pay your phone bill?

None of us like being treated like a number but to be referred to as a 16 digit alpha numeric number is both laughable and insulting. There a few things that incite me to ear-bleeding rage, and this is one of them.

Here's my BT account number: ND5527 1315 MO14 IN
You're welcome to it!

When I call BT and try to pay my bill they tell me that they can't accept payment without this critical piece of information. "Funny" I say "...but I just haven't found time to memorize it yet and I'm in the car right now". "Well I'm afraid you'll have to call back later when you DO have it" is their response.
"What are you worried about?" I say "Are you concerned that I might wilfully and maliciously try to pay somebody else's bill for them?"

My telephone number is a unique number - if it weren't it would be useless. Why can't they use my telephone number as my account number? How many possible variations can there be of a 16 digit alpha numeric number? It should be several hundred billion. That's a LOT of customers.

My gas and water bills are the same. 12 and 19 digits long respectively
My bank account is just 9 digits long. That's still enough permutations for every inhabitant of earth to be a Lloyds TSB customer. Coincidence? Combine it with my sort code and my eyes start to glaze over at the infinite possibilities.....

Sure - flame me and tell me I'm being unreasonable and that there are valid reasons for them to use 16 digit numbers, that it's to do with checksum digits, legacy software, process and security .

Bottom line is this - I don't care what a company calls me internally. But I go incandescant with rage when they forget their manners sufficiently to address me directly by anything other than Mr Lack. If they have a problem verifying which Mr Lack then ask me my postcode or a suitable security question.

I've really reached breaking point on this one - there are just too many numbers in my life. It's a lonely world out there and sometimes I just need the girl in the call centre to reach out to me a bit and say my name.

Who's got your e-mail address

Have you ever considered how many sites have your e-mail address? About 18 months ago I sat down and performed a few fag-packet calculations and figured that at least 4,500 sites have mine. Don't ask me how I arrived at that figure - but it's the sum total of all the sites, the forums, and the registration pages of all kinds I've ever filled in since 1995. In the last 24 hours alone I've given my e-mail address to no less than 15 sites.

So there I sat - concerned and feeling slightly slutty that so many people have my e-mail address. Perhaps more worryingly - I use the same password for everything I do. The account I use to access any one of seven webmail accounts employs the same [patently obvious] password that I use to access my joint bank account. If somebody wanted to rip me off they'd have a field day. Now I don't consider myself paranoid but If I got drunk at a party and handed out 4,500 copies of my front door key to relative strangers I'd be worried...and embarrassed

Worse still is the fact that once you publish your e-mail address to a web page - maybe just your homepage, perhaps just a post that you made to a thread on the Iraq crisis - it's only a matter of time before the Spam Spiders come and get you. Spiders? Yes. Even novice spam-punks can download free e-mail extractor software that lets them send eager little spiders out to the web which (after a few hours cavorting through HTML files), come back to them with thousands of e-mail addresss garnered from random sites. I've used this software myself and it's alarmingly effective. You can even point it at target victims. After a half hour crash course I managed to rip off the 2,150 e-mail addresses for every member of the law society in the UK. http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/. Child's play! I toyed for a while with the notion of sending them penis enlargement ads, such is my dislike of lawyers.

RULE ONE: NEVER POST YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS ON THE WEB IF YOU EVER WANT TO SEE THE BOTTOM OF YOUR INBOX AGAIN.

The problem you see is that you never know who you can trust. I just didn't have a clue who was selling my address or leaving the doors to their site wide-open (in violation of their privacy policy). What I did know was that the spam was piling up; some of it shocking, some of it appropriate - I mean how did these guys guess that I'm into transsexual goats?

My solution was thus:
RULE TWO: NEVER GIVE OUT YOUR *REAL* EMAIL ADDRESS.

Buy your own domain. I bought www.richardlack.com. It cost me £10 plus another £20 anually for e-mail forwarding. Now *anything* that's sent to @richardlack.com is forwarded to my broadband e-mail address (which I NEVER give out). Here's how it works. If I want to subscribe to ecademy I give my e-mail address as ecademy@richardlack.com. Likewise if I want to post my opinion on the BBC website I use bbc@richardlack.com. Simple!

But what's fun is that whenever I get spam I now look at the e-mail address it's been sent to. If I get an offer of censorious concern regarding luscious Latvian lolitas from 'kjfjg_1123@yahoo.co.uk' which is addressed to bbc@richardlack.com I'll know that somebody either bought or stole my address from the Beeb. Either way I can go after the bods at broadcasting house and demand damages for breach of privacy.

One final word on the subject.

RULE THREE: If you absolutely MUST post your address on your personal homepage or your corporate website - do what I do: Post your address as a .gif file so it can't be read by spiders: http://www.richardlack.com/contact.htm, or use a prefix that identifies it so you can plug the hole later when it leaks i.e homepage@richardlack.com

P.S anyone in the market for 2,150 lawyer's e-mail addresses. Never used. One careful owner.

First Post to my new blog!

Welcome to my new blog which has been relocated from Ecademy to make space for developments at www.yourparty.org