Week 10 2014

Tendring Topics……..on line

Birds of a Feather………

          HRH the Prince of Wales referred to them as ‘headless chicken’. Writing recently in the Church Times (not a publication likely to be accused of sensationalism or scare mongering)  Paul Vallely, Senior Research Fellow at the Brooks World Poverty Institute at Manchester University, prefers to call climate change deniers 'ostriches'. That’s rather more appropriate because ostriches are popularly believed to bury their heads in the sand rather than observe, and do something about, scary things going on around them.

            Paul Vallely quotes a geography professor who told him that if the floods and gales of this winter are the beginning of climate change (and most intelligent observers are now convinced that they are) then there is nothing that we can do about it.  What seems to us now to be ‘extreme weather’ will be the norm for at least twenty years.  However he tempered that apocalyptic message by adding that ‘all we can do now is to stop it getting worse’.

            ‘Climate change deniers’, says Paul Vallely, ‘always insist that you cannot prove a causal link between one spell of extreme weather and global warming. That is true, just as you cannot link one specific cigarette to a smoker’s developing lung cancer.  Trends though, are another matter’.

            Lord Stone, a punctilious and naturally cautious man with a great concern for academic accuracy, is a friend and former colleague of Paul Vallely.  He wrote a seminal report on climate change in 2006 and recently noted that four of the five wettest years ever recorded in the UK have occurred since 2,000 – and so have the seven warmest!  Elsewhere in the world Australia has just had its hottest year on record. North America has been gripped by a polar vortex.  Bangladesh has had two ‘once-in-lifetime’ cyclones in three years.  The Philippines have had their worst-ever cyclone.

            It might have been thought that global warming would make the weather warmer here in Britain.  That though, is not the case.  Scientists warned years ago that the first change the UK could expect would be more rain and wind, since a warmer atmosphere holds more water and energy, meaning more floods – and thus it has happened!

            Looking back, Lord Stern says that his verdict back in 2006 should have been harsher than it was.  ‘Since then, annual greenhouse-gas emissions have increased steeply, and some of the impacts, such as the decline of Arctic sea ice, have started to happen much more quickly’

            Paul Vallely notes that recently our Prime Minister advised the folk of flood-stricken Upton-on-Severn to speak to ‘the man upstairs’ about the floods.  Paul comments that prayer is not a sufficient answer and that, as his grandmother used to say, God helps those who help themselves.   To expect God miraculously to remedy the harm that we humans have done to our environment is almost as stupid as believing that the floods are God’s punishment for our approving same-sex marriages!

            The God in whom I believe, created the Universe and everything in it using evolution and natural selection as his tools.  That God is present, both throughout the Universe and as an 'inward light' within the souls of every man, woman and child in the world.  He listens to and answers our prayers but, as St. Theresa has declared, ‘In this world God has no hands but ours to do his work; no feet but ours to run his errands’ and he (I could with equal accuracy have said ‘she’ or ‘it’) has given us free will.

            We humans have chosen to follow the paths of greed, covetousness and relentless competition with each other for wealth and worldly possessions, rather than those of co-operation, compassion and sharing the earth’s riches with our fellow men and women. We have squandered the world’s finite resources and as greenhouse gases accelerate climate change, we are rendering our planet uninhabitable.  God does not punish us for folly and selfishness. We punish ourselves.

            Here is the final paragraph of Paul Vallely’s article:   If what we are seeing around us is the result of a two-degree rise in global temperatures, what can we expect from the four degrees rise that many scientists say is inevitable unless we cut carbon emissions?  Lord Stern suggests mass migrations, conflict and war.  The last time the global temperature was five degrees different from today, the earth was gripped by an ice age.  We cannot say that we have not been warned

……..flock together.

            

            I have been following the reports of the trial of Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson – both were senior employees of Ruper Murdoch's News International  and both were close friends and confidantes of Prime Ministers and other top politicians of both the main political parties. Andy Coulson was for some time David Cameron’s personal spin doctor.  Now they are both on trial in connection with alleged phone hacking and attempts to pervert the course of justice while they were employed by News International.  I was particularly interested to note that Tony Blair, former Prime Minister and creator of New Labour had offered Rebekah Brooks his support and told her that he would similarly help and advise Rupert Murdoch, who owns and heads News International.

           

          Pioneers of the Labour Party – Keir Hardie, George Lansbury, Sir Stafford Cripps, Clem Attlee, Jenny Lee and Nye Bevan must surely be turning in their graves. Rupert Murdoch, his  lieutenants, and his News International stand for everything that the Labour Movement was created to oppose.

  

 The Ukrainian Tragedy

 Seventy years ago – when I was a PoW at a small Arbeitskommando (working camp) in Eastern Germany we regularly worked and (when we had learned a little basic German) chatted with civilian fellow-workers who were clearly not German and who wore a distinguishing badge OST sewn onto their jackets. We soon learned that the OST was short for Ostarbeiter (worker from the east) and that they were conscripted ‘slave workers’ from German occupied areas of Russia and the Ukraine.

There were men and women. We got to know them very well both as fellow forced-workers and as friends. There is nothing like having a common enemy to bring people together, and all we foreign conscripted workers, PoWs and civilians, were good friends.  Much more recently I have learned about the rift between western and eastern Ukraine. Is the Ukrainian language very different from Russian?  That's certainly not the impression that I gained - but perhaps the Ukrainians that I knew all came from the Eastern Ukraine.  They were certainly friendly enough with their Russian fellow 'Ostarbeiters'.  In Russian ‘Ukraine’ means ‘the Outlands’, a province in the south of the former Tsarist Empire acting as a buffer zone against the always threatening Turks.

Many 'Ostarbeiters', Russians and Ukrainians alike, had seen their parents and their village elders killed in cold blood by German SS units.  Some, particularly the girls, had themselves had horrific experiences before being rounded up and deported to Germany.  They were invariably friendly, cheerful and patient.  Many of them were genuinely interested in our lives in Britain.   Daily we heard the thunder of gunfire from the Eastern Front grow louder and louder as the Soviet Armies advanced through Poland and into Germany.   We learned a few words and phrases in Russian from our Ukrainian and Russian friends and fellow-workers. These proved immensely valuable to me when the war came to an end and a mate and I were hitch-hiking our way through Soviet occupied Czechoslovakia on our way home to England!

Now the children and grandchildren of those warm-hearted and friendly young men and women have been killing each other in the streets of Kiev and other Ukrainian cities, and all the major powers can do is ‘take sides’ – the Russian Government supporting the ousted Ukrainian President, and the UK, USA and EU supporting the rebels (just as in the Syrian blood-bath!)  At the heart of the quarrel between the two Ukrainian factions seems to be whether Ukraine should seek the friendship and support of the EU or of Russia. 

 For goodness sake!   The cold war is over and the ‘iron curtain’ drawn aside.  Is it really impossible for Ukraine to enjoy the friendship of both – and to enter into military alliance with neither;  perhaps even to serve as a friendly bridge between us and our Russian former allies?   Have we forgotten already the contribution that the Soviet Army (mostly Russians and Ukrainians) made towards the defeat of the Nazis?  Winston Churchill said that it was the Red Army that ‘tore the guts out of the Nazi War Machine’ and I have no doubt at all that had it not been for their efforts and their sacrifice (8 million dead!) I would, at the best, have remained a prisoner for at least another two or three years. It is much more likely though that I would never have come home at all. I now have good friends in Germany and, in particular, in the small town where I spent the last eighteen months of World War II as a PoW – but I have always remembered with gratitude those to whom I owe my life and my liberty.

Late News

I wrote the above three days ago (on 28th February) and things have moved swiftly since then. Russian troops have moved into the Crimea where they appear to have been welcomed by the civilian population. They have, in effect, confined troops of the interim Ukrainian Government to their own bases.  I can only hope and pray that the world's rulers will keep their heads cool and their eyes on world peace rather than on scoring points or losing 'face'.  Is it not just possible that the presence of a considerable Russian force in  the Crimean peninsula will deter the current provisional government from attempting to force their ideas and their culture on their compatriots in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, thus provoking another civil conflict?

I do find the holier-than-thou attitude of the government of the USA somewhat surprising.  Some of us still remember the USA's backing of the disastrous 'Bay of Pigs' attempted invasion of Cuba, the USA's illegal blockade of Cuban ports endangering international shipping and - almost exactly thirty years ago - the completely unprovoked USA led invasion of the  Caribbean island of Grenada  for no purpose other than regime change.  This was condemned by the United Nations General Assembly as an act of unprovoked aggression though the UK's government, then headed by 'iron lady' Margaret Thatcher was strangely silent, despite the fact that Grenada was then part of the British Commonwealth and its head of state was our Queen.

‘First cast the plank out of your own eye, and you will see more clearly how to deal with the mote in the eye of your brother’   St. Matthew Chapter 7 verse 5

 

             

           

           

Week 27.2011 12.7.2011

Tendring Topics………on Line


The End of the World? Not quite; just its bad ‘News’!


The only thing that surprises me about the phone-hacking scandal that led to the closure of the News of the World are the depths to which this revolting publication appears to have sunk. Could they really have hacked into the mobile phone of an abducted and (as we now know) murdered child, read the texts on it and then deleted some of them, leaving space for more? Surely even they must have realized that they were raising false hopes that the child was still alive and capable of using her phone. They were also, of course, confusing the Police and hindering their investigation. Perhaps they were well aware of this, but confident that they’d never be found out, just didn’t care.

As the days passed we learned of ever more outrages committed by Mr Rupert Murdoch’s news-vultures, as they rummaged for tasty morsels among the entrails of other people’s grief. This didn’t surprise me. The News of the World has for many years been prepared to go to any lengths (perhaps I should have said ‘any depths’) to get a sensational and scurrilous news story. I became aware of this personally in the late 1970s. The News of the World had been an early acquisition of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire and had been under his control for a decade.

My wife Heather and I had always tried to instil a social conscience and what we thought of as ‘Quaker values’ into our two sons. We were, I think, successful in this - even though we didn’t manage to turn them into regular ‘go-to-Meeting’ Quakers! Thus it was that one of them, living and working in a London suburb, volunteered to give some of his time (and much of his sleep!) as a volunteer at Centrepoint, the Central London Shelter for homeless young people. He told us some heart-rending but uplifting stories of 16 to 21 year olds who had made their way there, had been given emergency shelter and helped to find a more permanent home and begin a new life. It was a charity that subsequently attracted the interest of Princess Diana and her two sons, Princes William and Harry.

While our son was helping there, a News of the World snooper (I suppose that he would have called himself an investigative journalist!) pretended that he was homeless and was welcomed; thereby taking a place that could have helped a truly homeless young person! He discovered that circumstances sometimes made it necessary for homeless boys and girls to sleep in the same room, though obviously in separate bunks. His sensational story, suggesting that Centrepoint was little more than a Charity-run brothel, discouraged and disheartened volunteers and donors – and probably resulted in some homeless young people preferring to take their chance in shop doorways and bus shelters! I am glad to say that Centrepoint recovered from the scandal and went on from strength to strength.

I am equally glad that the News of the World hasn’t make a similar recovery from the scandal that engulfed it, even though I suspect that it has been sacrificed in the greater interests of the Murdoch Empire, and that it will before long re-appear with a different title, but much the same ethics. I only hope that no-one suggests that its closure means that ‘a line has been drawn under the matter’. On the contrary, the public enquiries already set in place should be pursued with increased rigour. They should be conducted by a judge, and witnesses required to give evidence under oath, so that those who lie can be prosecuted for perjury. Serious consideration should also be given to the ownership of newspapers and radio and tv stations that can sway public opinion and win or lose British elections.

I have found degrading in the extreme, the spectacle of British Prime Ministers (Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron – they’ve all done it) humbly seeking the favourable attention of a foreign newspaper proprietor!

I abhor petty nationalism and I hope that no one would accuse me of being xenophobic. I do feel very strongly though that British news media should always be under widely distributed British ownership and control. Popular newspapers or tv stations, controlled by those who do not share our history, and our cultural and moral values, can do far more harm to the British ethos than many thousands of the immigrant Poles, Slovaks and other East Europeans that UKIP and BNP supporters and their like worry so much about.

Mrs Rebekah Brooks


Mrs Rebekah Brooks is a colourful figure at the very centre of the scandal that led to the demise of the News of the World. A friend of the Cameron family (yes, our Prime Minister and his family) and promoted to Chief Executive of News International, she was that scurrilous Sunday newspaper’s editor at the time that the alleged phone hacking and bribery of police officers was taking place. The editor of any newspaper or magazine is ultimately responsible for the publication’s content and for the behaviour of its reporters, journalists and other staff. It is with the editor that, as they say in Mr Rupert Murdoch’s adopted homeland, ‘the buck stops’.

That being so, it is surely extraordinary that she has made no admission of guilt or responsibility, has no intention of resigning her office and doesn’t expect News International’s ‘emperor’ to require her to do so. In this, she is clearly correct. Mr Murdoch has initiated a stringent internal enquiry into what has been going wrong with the News of the World - under the leadership of Mrs. Brooks.

This is surely rather as though Hitler having heard, for the first time, disquieting rumours about what was going on in Auschwitz, were to have put Heinrich Himmler in charge of a thorough investigation there! Why, I wonder, is Mrs Brooks so confident of her position? Why is Mr Murdoch so supportive of a senior member of his staff from whom he might have been expected to wish to dissociate himself. Could it be that she is, in some way beyond my knowledge or understanding, a keystone of News International and in a position to bring that mighty Empire tumbling in ruins about our ears?

An on-going story!

It was just before the weekend that I wrote the above – yet already the story has changed. The News of the World is no longer. Another journalist has been arrested. Rupert Murdoch has flown over from the USA to exert personal control. Mrs Brooks is no longer heading an internal investigation but is to be interviewed by the police. She is, so we are assured, not being interviewed as a suspect but as a witness.

When Andy Coulson left Lewisham Police Station after he had been helping the police with their enquiries, his remark that ‘there is a lot I would like to say, but cannot right now’, may well have sent a shiver down several well-heeled spines! In ‘Midsomer County’ it would have presaged the early departure of the speaker from this world, and yet another case for Detective Chief Inspector Barnaby!

Come to think of it, the present situation has all the ingredients of a first class tv drama – a sleazy newspaper, a cosmopolitan news media billionaire, corrupt coppers and an utterly ruthless but glamorous redhead with a fatal charm that gains her entrée to the highest circles. You really couldn’t have made it up!

I can’t wait for the next instalment!

Some News from Suffolk

Despite having lived in Essex for well over half my life, I still think of myself as being essentially ‘a Suffolk Swedebasher’. I have been interested therefore in the saga of Mrs. Andrea Hill, Suffolk County Council’s Chief Executive and one of the highest paid local government officers in the country - and that is saying quite a lot!

Appointed in 2008 on a salary of £218,000 a year, many of her colleagues had disliked what was claimed to have been her ‘domineering management style’. An Independent Enquiry into allegations of bullying, harassment and irregular expenses claims, was launched after the body of David White, the County Council’s Head of Legal Services had been found hanging in Butley Woods near Ipswich. She has been on extended leave with full pay since Easter, while this Enquiry took place.

The result has now been made known. A statement from the county council says that it is satisfied that ‘there was no evidence to support claims of bullying or harassment, or that Mrs Hill was in any way responsible for Mr White’s death. With regard to the expenses claims it had been concluded that there had been no dishonesty but that, ‘some of her claims might not have represented the best use of public money’

It was agreed that Mrs White would resign her post forthwith, with the ‘golden handshake’ of a year’s pay - £218,000. No doubt that was dictated by the terms of her contract on appointment. It isn’t too difficult though to imagine the reaction of former Suffolk County Council employees who will have received a pittance on being made redundant during her period of office.

I learn from the local Gazette that Colchester as well as Suffolk had had the benefit of Mrs Hill’s services. From 2001 until 2004 she had headed Colchester Borough Council’s Management Team, on a salary in the region of £80,000 a year, before departing ‘to fresh fields and pastures new’. In this position she is said to have initiated Colchester’s ‘Firstsite Art Gallery Project’, a frequent inspiration of angry and indignant letters in the local press. It is three years behind schedule and, says the daily Gazette, likely to end up costing £28 million!

Colchester’s outspoken Lib.Dem MP Bob Russell is quoted as saying, ‘I considered her tenure at Colchester Council to have been a disaster. Council taxpayers of Colchester will be paying for decades to come’.


A ‘Family Friendly’ Government?

That’s what they say – but the facts contradict this claim.. All the evidence suggests that the second decade of the 21st Century is a distinctly unpropitious time to be raising a family – except of course for those who, like most of the friends and relatives of our top politicians, are seriously wealthy. For them the purchase of food and other items on which most of us have to spend a large part of our total income, will only form a small fraction of their expenditure.

A report in the Church of England newspaper ‘The Church Times’ reveals that a survey for the Quaker founded Joseph Rowntree Foundation (it is circumstances like this that make me doubly happy about my dual membership!) has found that ‘Families need to earn 20 percent more this year than last year if they are to maintain an acceptable standard of living’. What is an ‘acceptable standard of living’? The Church Times says, ‘Since 2008 the JRF has gathered information about focus groups to set a benchmark for what it considers to be ‘an acceptable standard of living’. The benchmark is set at a level that rules out extravagances but allows for such items as a mobile phone and a self-catering holiday in the UK once a year. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

The JRF found that parents with two children needed to earn £18,400 each to reach that standard – a total of £36,800, both parents working full time. This compares with £28,727 a year ago. Families with just one earner need gross earnings of £31,200 and a lone parent would need to be earning £18.200 to meet the minimum acceptable standard of living. The worst hit are those claiming credits for child care, who need to meet a 24 percent shortfall to maintain their standard of living. The official cost of living rose by 4.5 percent in the year to April but the price of ‘essential items’ rose from between 4.7 and 5.7 percent in the same period because of a sharp increase in the price of food during the past year.

Author of the report, Donald Hirsch from Loughborough University says, ‘In practice, earnings have risen by less than inflation, meaning that people on low incomes are finding it substantially harder to make ends meet than a year ago.

‘The squeeze in living standards, caused by the combination of rising prices and stagnant incomes, is hitting people on low incomes hard……in particular the reduction in support for child care has made many low-earning families worse off, it has substantially reduced the incentive to work for relatively low pay, for families who need to use child care in order to do so'.


Meanwhile fuel prices have gone up yet again. Many – particularly the poorest of us – are going to face a stark choice this coming winter: Heat or Eat? They’ll be hard put to it to manage both.

 Family Friendly? I don’t think so.