Archive for Economic

Proved right over using reserves

15 March 2012 jonathanbishop No comments
As someone with a Masters in economics and advocate of New Labour’s choice and competition agenda, it was quite strange to find myself agreeing with Old Labour stalwart Graham Stacey, with regards to the amendments posed to the RCT budget by Plaid Cymru’s leader Pauline Jarman (March 8). I agreed 100% with his view that taking money out of the reserves to fund the budget was not the best thing to do in difficult circumstances.
This is exactly what I said from day one on the Pontypridd Town Council’s Finance committee when I was elected in May 2008, before coming off and opposing it two years ago. The ruling Labour regime didn’t listen even though I warned them (that) using reserves to fund a budget freeze would mean tax rises or more drastic service cuts would be needed – I was proved right.
It was good that RCT has been able to keep its service provision as Graham said. However, this is at the expense of the communities of Pontypridd and Llantwit Fardre. While RCT’s proportion of the council tax precept has been rising, the precepts for these two councils have been falling it real terms. This is why over the last four years the number of playschemes in Llantwit Fardre has been halved, and the funding of the fireworks display and regeneration projects virtually slashed to nothing in Pontypridd.
Is it right that budgets focussed on our local communities are being cut so the rest of RCT can keep their services?f
Bestowal, Boundlessness, Breadth, Economic, Letters and other Op-Eds

Imogen Thomas, Katherine Jenkins and John Hartson have suffered – now it’s time to clamp down on cyber-bullies

4 March 2012 jonathanbishop No comments

First they targeted glamour model Imogen Thomas before attacking fellow Welsh celebs Katherine Jenkins and Gareth Thomas.

Courtesy of Wikipedia

And now cyber-bullies have abused football legend John Hartson and led him to quit social networking site Twitter.

The former centre forward is the latest high profile Welsh celebrity who has become a victim of sickening online outbursts prompting calls from anti-bullying campaigners and internet experts for “serious action”.

Such is the level of abuse aimed at Hartson in the past few months that he has been forced to quit Twitter last week.

The 36-year-old, who had nearly 125,000 followers tweeted: “I’m sorry to all my genuine followers but I shall be coming off Twitter in the next 48 hours! I have my own reasons for doing so.”

In July last year the former Celtic striker was taunted about a dying 11-year-old cancer sufferer he had befriended.

Courtesy of Wikipedia

Hartson, who himself fought cancer, was left outraged when someone posted a string of twisted sectarian messages about terminally ill Jordan Houston.

Earlier this month he also slammed a Twitter troll who told him to “drop dead”.

Keith Towler, the Children’s Commissioner for Wales, said his office had seen a steady rise in the number of people seeking advice about online bullying and described the issue as a “sleeping giant”.

He said cyber-bullying was much harder to stamp out than physical bullying because of the constant development of new technology.

“In my generation bullying was something you associated with the school playground, it was something which happened at the school gates and something you could leave behind when you went home,” said Mr Towler.

“But now, what children and young people talk about is that it’s much more 24/7 because of modern technology.

“If we are to ensure children are kept safe then parents first need to realise the extent that their child is using the internet everyday.

“Parents need to become more savvy themselves about the technology and that way the necessary safeguards can be put in place.

“We need to ensure children can feel safe when using these modern technologies in a way which will not prevent them from the fantastic benefits they provide.”

Internet expert Jonathan Bishop, who runs the Crocels Trolling Academy, part of Swansea University’s Institute of Life Sciences, said the police should be more proactive in addressing harassment online.

“As it is, it’s all too easy for someone to abuse someone without any repercussions,” he said.

“When you think that councils can use things like the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act to snoop on whether parents applying to schools are in the right catchment area why can’t the police use it to find these perpetrators?

“There is a lot people can do to combat cyber bullying but ultimately the responsibility lies with the websites and they are not taking the issue seriously enough.

“There are loads of tools available to people – such as software which has filters for social networks which allow you to block any person you want – but people don’t always know it’s available and don’t know how to use it.”

Des Mannion, NSPCC national head of service for Wales said: “Any online bullying is offensive and demeaning and should be stamped out immediately.

“Bullying in all forms causes misery for thousands of children and is one of the main reasons children contact ChildLine.

“Twenty-four hour internet access and an increased use of mobile phones means that cyber bullying is on the rise and young people can be abused by text, email or social networking sites in their homes.”

He added children and young people who need to talk can contact ChildLine, the UK’s free, confidential 24-hour helpline, on 0800 1111 or visit childline.org.uk.

News and Public Relations, Newsprint, Social Media

Tweety Bye For Legend Hartson – Big John quits Twitter after sickening abuse

4 March 2012 jonathanbishop No comments

First they targeted glamour model Imogen Thomas before attacking fellow Welsh celebs Katherine Jenkins and Gareth Thomas.

And now cyber-bullies have abused football legend John Hartson and led him to quit social networking site Twitter.

The former centre forward is the latest high-profile Welsh celebrity who has become a victim of sickening online outbursts prompting calls from anti-bullying campaigners and internet experts for “serious action”. Such is the level of abuse aimed at Hartson in the past few months that he has been forced to quit Twitter last week.

Courtesy of Wikipedia

The 36-year-old, who had nearly 125,000 followers tweeted: “I’m sorry to all my genuine followers but I shall be coming off Twitter in the next 48 hours! I have my own reasons for doing so.”

Last July the ex-Celtic striker was taunted over 11-year-old cancer sufferer he befriended.

Hartson, who himself fought cancer, was left outraged when someone posted a string of twisted sectarian messages about terminally-ill Jordan Houston.

Earlier this month he also slammed a Twitter troll who told him to “drop dead“.

Keith Towler, the Children’s Commissioner for Wales, said his office had seen a steady rise in the number of people seeking advice about online bullying and described the issue as a “sleeping giant”.

He said cyber-bullying was much harder to stop than physical bullying due to constant new technology.

“In my generation bullying was something you associated with the school playground, it was something which happened at the school gates and something you could leave behind when you went home,” said Mr Towler.

“But now, what children and young people talk about is that it’s much more 24/7 because of modern technology.

“If we are to ensure children are kept safe then parents first need to realise the extent that their child is using the internet everyday.

“Parents need to become more savvy themselves about the technology and that way the necessary safeguards can be put in place.

“We need to ensure children can feel safe when using these modern technologies in a way which will not prevent them from the fantastic benefits they provide.”

Internet expert Jonathan Bishop, who runs the Crocels Trolling Academy, part of Swansea University’s Institute of Life Sciences, said the police should be more proactive in addressing harassment online.

“As it is, it’s all too easy for someone to abuse someone without any repercussions,” he said.

“When you think that councils can use things like the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act to snoop on whether parents applying to schools are in the right catchment area why can’t the police use it to find these perpetrators? “There is a lot people can do to combat cyber bullying but ultimately the responsibility lies with the websites and they are not taking the issue seriously enough.

“There are loads of tools available to people – such as software which has filters for social networks which allow you to block any person you want – but people don’t always know it’s available or how to use it.”

Des Mannion, NSPCC national head of service for Wales, said: “It’s offensive and demeaning and should be stamped out immediately.

“Bullying in all forms causes misery for thousands of children and is one of the main reasons children contact Child-Line.

“Twenty-four hour internet access and an increased use of mobile phones means that cyber bullying is on the rise and young people can be abused by text, email or social networking sites in their homes.”

Children and young people who need to talk can contact the free, confidential ChildLine 24-hour helpline, on 0800 1111 or visit childline.org.uk.

News and Public Relations, Newsprint, Social Media

What is the purpose of the bureauclass?

28 February 2012 jonathanbishop One comment

In any failed political system are what I call the ‘bureauclass’. These are people whose job it is to get in the way of people who are doing proper jobs.

I came across one today at my local take away. They were an official from the local authority asking why the shopkeeper had not post a poster up which displayed some information that the law said they must. Why are we the tax payers paying for people to go around inspecting whether businesses are displaying posters or not? The Bureauclasses are getting their lifestyles subsided by the businesses who are paying the corporation tax so they can have a job that serves no real purpose!

These bureauclass workers in the public sector are getting good pensions and unnecessarily high wages though union negotiations when they produce nothing but paperwork. Printed matter can’t be so essential to our GDP than we need the bureauclass to exist to fund it?

An lonely on-looker's diary - The world through the eyes of an Aspie, Breadth, Socio-legal, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

Justice for Georgia

22 February 2012 jonathanbishop No comments

I write further to the news that Anthony Buck from Stockport was sentenced to four months in prison following posting racist abuse on Facebook (Echo, February 16).

Would the police authorities like to enlighten me what the difference between this hateful attack on Muslims that was prosecuted under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and those vile attacks on the memory of Liverpool teenager Georgia Varley?

Steve Rotheram, MP for Liverpool Walton, says new Internet trolling laws are needed, thus denying Georgia Varley's family legal justice. Credit: Liverpool Echo

It was reported in the ECHO that after meeting Facebook about the abuse, that Walton MP Steve Rotheram was convinced the issue was one of balancing free speech and censorship and that he would put pressure on social networks. Can Mr Rotheram tell me that if the police are willing to send Anthony Buck to prison for four months, Sean Duffy for 18 weeks, and Jamie Counsel for four years, all for flame trolling offences on Facebook, why the law is somehow too weak to bring justice to Georgia’s family?

Letters and other Op-Eds, Social Media ,

How Labour and the Trade Unions Destroyed the Construction Industry’s Marxist Utopia

6 February 2012 jonathanbishop 2 comments

Pre-2007 many workers in the construction industry of which I was part were de-facto Marxists – they were self-employed and could decide when they worked and when they didn’t, and how much they were willing to work for and which they wouldn’t.

But then at the request of the trade unions, the Labour Government forced nearly all these workers to become employed by the private firms. In effect, they were working against the Marxist ideal of the workers controlling their own lives without being dictated to by business owners, by forcing them onto employment contracts that meant private business owners had more say over their working terms and conditions than before! Whereas before they could take a holiday whenever they wanted, now they had to do it whenever it was best for the firm. They may have had more employment rights, but this was at the sacrifice of other perks, like having allowable expenses and paying a flat 20% tax. So, a Labour Government in effect, in order to please the unions and get a few more bucks for the tax man, took the dreams of its party’s founders, of an end to domination of people’s lives by big capitalist firms, and replaced it with further domination by capitalist firms by taking away the rights of workers to withdraw their labour on their terms without having to ballot a trade union for the right to do so.

Any Marxist sympathisers who would rather willingly work for someone else’s private firm than set up their own on either a self-employed or sole-shareholder limited company basis therefore, is too much talk and not enough action. How exactly do they expect capitalism and the state to fall if they are each day of their working lives sucking their metaphorical teet?!

Any socialist who willingly works for a private firm that they or their family don’t own are capitalist sell-outs also. If they truly believed in their ideology they would do what I have done:

Take control of the means of production, distribution and exchange by becoming self-employed and the sole shareholder of their own firm, while co-operating with others through mutually owned co-operatives.

It seems to me on most issues, the people who claim to believe that the workers should own the means of production, distribution an exchange, are all too happy  for the status quo of a government, trade union, and big business oligopoly to continue rather than take the risk of going it alone as Marx envisaged.

Bestowal, Boundlessness, Breadth, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

Policy on Women’s Rights

5 February 2012 jonathanbishop No comments

It is my view that women should not seek to treated the same way as men but should assert their own identity and expect to be treated equally to them by their differences being taken into account.

Consider for a moment this jovial comment:

My wife is so funny – so typical of women. She always gets me to put the toilet seat down. Why doesn’t she put it up for me?!

Would you say this was sexist? If yes then you need to question your ethics. By not accepting that women have different needs to men, then people are being institutionally discriminatory on the grounds of sex. Treating women equally means treating them differently. One would treat women the same if they were made to use the same urinals as men – but they would not have equal access to relive themselves as men unless there were WC cubicles installed.

I set out below my policies in relation to women’s rights.

The Status Quo

These are a number policies that are currently law relating to women that I agree with:

  • All women-short-lists are a proportionate means to acheive a legitimate aim of increasing the number of women in public life.
  • In the case of interviewing people for employment, where there is a tie between a man and a woman, the woman should be treated more favourably, except if the man is disabled and she isn’t.
  • Women who have new born children should be allowed to bring them into the workplace and be able to breast feed them if they wish providing they are never left unsupervised, for their own protection as any.
  • Women with young children should be allowed to ask for flexible working in order that their job supports their family life rather than detract from it.
  • Women should have the right to abortion – It is inhuman and degrading treatment to expect her to carry a foetus she doesn’t want.

New Rights

These are a number of new rights I want women to have:

  • When a woman is the best person for the job, she should be given the right to request that the second best candidate be offered the chance to job share with her if she wants flexible working.
  • Women who are in self-employment should have the same access to maternity pay and other rights as women who are employed.
  • A woman should have a statutory right to have her embryos frozen so that she can have her career without the risk of sacrificing her chance to found a family afterwards.

Taking up parenthood should not mean giving up one's career

These are the rights I want women and parents/guardians in general to have:

  • Where a parent has a child with behavioural difficulties they should immediately qualify for a Blue Badge and be able to park in disabled parking spaces.
  • All ‘accessible toilets’ currently for disabled people should be fitted with baby changing facilities and other essential features a mother (or other parent) and child might need.
Auto-Wiki, Boundlessness, Policies and Consultations

More powers for Wales’ interests

28 January 2012 jonathanbishop No comments

I must contest F S Wusteman’s claim that an independent Wales would not have an independent voice in the EU (Letters, January 26).

If one were to look at the current EU Treaty (TFEU) there are 62 areas in which every EU country has to agree unanimously before that law can be passed – one of these is Article 113 relating to indirect taxation like VAT so no member state has to give up its tax regime as they suggested.

The problem Wales has is we are not properly represented in the EU Council of Ministers in which only David Cameron and his UK Ministers have a right to vote on behalf of the UK. This body must agree to every piece of EU legislation before it is made law – and in many cases it can completely overrule the European Parliament if it disagrees with them.

Wales has no right to veto EU law that could, for instance, affect our manufacturing – we are at the mercy of the UK Government.

Readers will recall me calling for a British Isles Customs Union of the four British nations, which while all independent, would agree to common laws which could include a common position on EU law (Letters, October 22, 2011). If England voted to leave the EU but join the EEA it would have to implement EU law but have no say in making it. But with the BICU Council of Ministers they could do both.

In the meantime, while the argument for independence is being won in principle even if not in detail, as looks likely in Scotland, there is a way all British nations can get an equal voice in the EU decision making processes without any new primary legislation from Westminster.

Section 109 of The Government of Wales Act 2006 gives the Welsh Government the power to ask for new powers from Westminster, which could include the right to direct the UK Prime Minister to veto any EU directive that does not meet Wales’s interests. Scotland and Northern Ireland could be granted the same power.

These provisions could lead to a more united British Isles, where each nation can represent its own citizens’ interests while co-operating where this is in the interest of all citizens in the British Isles.

Boundlessness, Law, Letters and other Op-Eds ,

Internet history

14 January 2012 jonathanbishop 3 comments

I appreciate Walton MP Steve Rotheram writing into the Echo to critique my status as a trolling authority (Letters, January 11). As his colleagues at Westminster would tell him, I could not contact him direct, as he would not be allowed to respond to my letter, unless I wrote to him through my own MP, as this is parliamentary convention.

The Telecommunications Act 1984 made it unlawful to make abusive messages on a public telecommunication service. It was used to prosecute Internet trolling in 2008.

Mr Rotheram mistakenly says the Telecommunications Act 1984 and Communications Act 2003 existed before trolling. The former Act existed during the time that Usenet was popular, which was a primitive form of Facebook Groups and BBS as well, a primitive form of the Facebook wall. The second Act came about when the social networking technology I invented in 1999 – the circle of friends – was being popularised by Friendster and MySpace, before becoming an essential part of Facebook when it became mainstream from 2007.

So like the word “social media” that he uses is the new word for “social networking” beyond these text-based interfaces, so the word “trolling”, has gone from meaning simply “act of posting a message in a newsgroup that is obviously exaggerating something on a particular topic” as described in 1995 in the Internet dictionary NetLingo, to refer to a specific act of posting inflammatory or obnoxious content (which may not be text) for one’s own or others entertainment.

He would know this, as any other Echo reader, if he read the pithy response to me by D Frederick from Garston in November (Letters, Nov 26).

Information Technology, Law, Letters and other Op-Eds, Social Media, Socio-legal ,

Does the European Convention on Human Rights Protect Children from DNA Thieves?

9 January 2012 jonathanbishop One comment

I will look at how the European Convention on Human Rights should protecto minors who have been abducted by a parent, who I shall call a DNA Thief, in order to stop them from associating with their other parent, who I shall call a Forced-Donor-Parent. On this basis, I shall call such a child a ‘Forced-Donation-Child’.

ARTICLE 3 – No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

If a Forced-Donation-Child is being told by a DNA Thief that their Forced-Donor-Parent is such that this would constitute defamation against the Forced-Donor-Parent then that is an abuse of the human rights of both the Forced-Donor-Parent and their Forced-Donation-Child.

ARTICLE 4 – No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

If a Forced-Donation-Child is being denied access to the Forced-Donor-Parent and they want to associate with them, then this is an abuse of their human rights.

ARTICLE 5 – Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.

This is except in this case: The lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound mind, alcoholics or drug addicts, or vagrants;

One could define a DNA Thief as a vagrant if they are always moving the Forced-Donation-Child from place to place, denying them a stable life, in order to prevent them for accessing the Forced-Donor-Parent.

ARTICLE 8 – Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

There is an exception to this: For the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This means that if a DNA Thief is denying the Forced-Donation-Child access to the Forced-Donor-Parent and vice versa, they have no right to privacy.

ARTICLE 9 – Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion

If a DNA Thief tries to indoctrinate a Forced-Donation-Child with hatred for their Forced-Donor-Parent of that First-Donor-Parents beliefs, then this is an abuse of the Forced-Donation-Child’s human rights and that of the Forced-Donor-Parent.

ARTICLE 10 – Everyone has the right to freedom of expression

This is except where, among other reasons: for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence.

One can see many ways in which a DNA Thief can indoctrinate a Forced-Donation-Child against a Forced-Donor-Parent.

ARTICLE 11 -Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

A DNA Thief who keeps denying a Forced-Donation-Child access to their Forced-Donor-Parent is breaching both Forced persons’ human rights.

Taking Articles 12 to 14 together:

ARTICLE 12 – Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right.

ARTICLE 13 – Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority

ARTICLE 14 – The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground

A Forced-Donor-Parent has the right to access a fair hearing to regain access their Forced-Donation-Child. By the DNA Thief denying the Forced-Donor-Parent access to their Forced-Donation-Child which was created by virtue of Article 12 and that Forced-Donor-Parent has committed no crime, then they are breaching Article 5, as they are denying the Forced-Donor-Parent the liberty to access their Forced-Donation-Child that they gained under Article 12. If the reason for the Forced-Donor-Parent being denied access to the Forced-Donation-Child was on the grounds of sex, such as any ‘maternal’ relationship then this is discrimination. By a tribunal making such a decision, they are breaching the rights of the Forced-Donation-Child and Forced-Donor-Parent to impartiality of the judiciary.

An lonely on-looker's diary - The world through the eyes of an Aspie, Boundlessness, Law, Socio-legal
« Older Entries   Recent Entries »