Hard of Understanding

They're supposed to (although we've already seen just how capable the BNP are of sticking to political party laws) all political parties need a bank account.

I want to know which bank it is so that I can make sure that none of my money also heads in that direction.

Who said democracy begins at the ballot box?

Right now, if I were a public sector worker I'd be a little paranoid about just how long I could expect to keep my job.

And if I were an employee of the Land Registry, then I'd be convinced that my employers not only had it in for me, but that they were trying to get rid of me on the quiet.

As you know, there is a minor tiff (!) at Royal Mail - R.I.P. btw - which looks to be 6 of one and half a dozen of the other, with the common or garden postie most likely to get shafted hardest whatever the outcome.

So can you imagine my surprise (and sarcasm) that the Land Registry has chosen today to announce that up to 1000 jobs face the axe.

If you are planning to play with people's livelihoods then you don't try to do it when you think that nobody will notice.

Unethical, unprofessional, out of order!

As a union man (different industry, different union) I have only this to say.

R.I.P. Royal Mail

nb. that dick in charge of the union has just played straight into management's hands. If I were a postie, I'd be wanting his head on a pointy stick.

According to the paper, scientists are working on stopping the aging process so that there could technically be 100 year olds with the body of someone half their age.

Now I'm going to leave the ethical arguments out of this here and go straight for the bleeding obvious.

Does that then mean that there'll be MILFS with the body of teens as well?

I've just been mooching around the internet - like you do - and come across the "Landscape Photographer of the Year" awards site. And I was breathtaken by what I saw. Stunning views, great angles, vibrant colours etc etc. Basically great works by people who had a lot of time and patience to wait for those "just right" shots to show off to the rest of us.

And those who took away awards for them were truly deserving of them.

So, from the article showcasing these works, were the comments those of hearty congratulations? HA, you wish!

These images look more like Hollywood computer graphics than anything you would see on this planet. A+ for using photoshop, but F for actually making and inspiring image of the natural world.

and

HDR or not, they're all (with the possible exception of the fell runners) a bit rubbish. There should be more to landscape photography than a pretty hill and a sunrise.

For those who don't know (and are maybe curious) this is HDR.

To be fair, there were complimentary comments, some direct, some gloved but in general I was appalled at the attitudes of these Armchair Experts who had plenty to say and very little to back it up with.

I'm now heading fast into dangerous territory as I'm not exactly known for holding my tongue, but my approach to matters is:

1. Could I do it better?
2. Have I properly researched it?
3. Is there a point, or is it a plain rant?
4. Would I actually say it face to face with those who I'm upsetting?

If the answer is "no" to any of the above, then I'm keeping schtum, ESPECIALLY point 4!

On occasion I'm wrong, or should have thought harder before I started typing (and always acknowledge when pulled up for it) but in general work by the principle that unless you can back up what you're saying, or at very least be constructive then what the hell have you put your boot in for?

Many (not all) of these comments following articles are the work of a bitter, ignorant, self-righteous band of cowards hiding behind their keyboards using anonymity as their shield. They spread their poison then move on to the next article like a virus.

So, a quick shout out to the sub-species determined to bring down another person's achievement. Unless you actually know something about the comments you are making and would have the guts to stand up in front of the rest of the world, identity stripped bare wiiling to be humiliated if incorrect, then keep the bile and vitriol to yourself.

You're just drowning out the comments that really mean something. Y'know, like "Well Done."

A wise businessman (I'm guessing that they are wise as they're still in business) told me that the best tine to pick up a bargain - such as a new company - is during a recession as the value plummets.

Right now I bet they're wetting themselves with delight as our Prime Minister has today announced that he intends to sell £16,000 million of public assets to raise short term capital.

During the biggest global downturn in living memory. Brilliant.

Well, it's official, as a country we are the chavs that appear on Ocean Finance ads when they've got too far out of their depth and start pawning the family silver.

I'm not usually a huge fan of my local authority, especially when it comes to selling off land / buildings that are surplus to requirements as they simply get the highest price possible, citing "Value for Money." which usually means that land which could be better served as a park will become a car park. But in this case, if our central govt. are insistent on selling off public assets, they had better bloody get the best possible price!

Just one request. If this is his idea of financial management when in charge, would it be too much to ask an auditor go in and assess what he must have been upto when he had control of the country's bank balance?

Can there be such a thing as open-source current affairs?

My gut is telling me on quality and accuracy the answer is no (but please feel free to correct me.) Currently, journalists go through a lot of training and education (at great expense) and then once they've qualified and begun work they still need folding stuff to be able to live.

We talk about "citizen reporting," non-qualified reporters with rudimentary pictures from camera phones, video pieces from camera phones and articles in locations such as, well, here. And the Five's "Gadget Show" even devoted a section to equipment suitable for such reporting. But what faith and reliance can we put in it in a world of demand for facts and reliability? And could the Press Complaints Commission, the gatekeepers of decency in our media police the non-professionals in the same way that it does the established media institutions?

And are we at risk of a two tier information society where there are those who pay for professional news articles, and those who have to rely on citizen reporting? With our society turning more to television on demand and even away from the television altogether, the internet is becoming the primary source of information of a generation.

There is a reason behind my mentality of this entry - one R. Murdoch.

At the World Media Summit in China he's turned his focus from the BBC to rattling the sabre at the likes of Google and Yahoo who re-publish news articles currently for free. He wants them to start paying for it, just like he wants everyone who accesses news sites directly to begin paying.

And a spokesman from AP (of whom I should imagine Murdoch is a very good customer) we had this little soundbite: We will no longer tolerate the disconnect between people who devote themselves - at great human and economic cost - to gathering news of public interest and those who profit from it without supporting it

Seems reasonable, but every cynical bone in my body is telling me that the timing - halfway through a recession with newspaper sales dwindling - is a little convenient. Also, it should be pointed out that if the article is accessed on a search engines "news" section then the provider can't put their ads up so there is potentially lost revenue there as well.

If you believe that open source news can work then please put your ideas here I'd love to hear them.

In the mean time, a warning to the media outlets.

The music industry completely underestimated the effect that the internet would have on sales and copyright. You need to make sure that whatever you do to carry on generating revenue that - it is accepted - you need to carry on news gathering, it needs to be properly thought out and implement otherwise it will fail and simply make matters worse.

10 years on the music industry still hasn't figured out the internet, don't become another casualty of it.

So, the Tories, Lib-Dems and - more mutedly - the incumbent government are now aware that cost savings need to be be made and first in the cross-hairs is the Civil Service.

Well lambasted by popular media for being a drain on national resources and for diverting funds away from other "more needed" (verification needed) areas.

And the braver of the parties are announcing exactly how many civil service roles will disappear with privatisation of sections being top of the Tories' wish list.

This may help with reducing the GDP deficit in the short to medium term in that either less will be spent on various departments or funds stay the same simply moving to another area.

But, and this is a BIG but, what happens with the workers "displaced." For displaced see "made redundant", put out of work. Unemployed.

Anyone got an answer for that, or will the funds simply transfer to the DWP?

Big gestures are all good and well. But following up these announcements with an actual plan that can be examined may be a little more appropriate when you are threatening people's careers for a few votes, no?

So, the staunch critic of the "No Win, No Fee" culture that has cost the NHS millions over the last few years has reached a deal with a firm to start using the practice to recoup money lost to fraud.

Patient groups have accused the institution of "Double standards."

I'm actually impressed by the decision. No really, very impressed.

As a taxpayer with a vested interest in my public services delivering value for money, I'm acutely aware of just how much our health service costs every year. So to hear that (and this is pretty rare) the NHS has embraced a system that will potentially save millions in litigation costs AND get back money lost to fraud, I'm over the moon.

It's only a pity that the same patient groups who've been strong advocates (indeed many members will have taken advantage of the system of NWNF) have only found something else to whinge about in it instead of thinking about what can be done with the saved money.

So, there we go; impressed by the NHS, disappointed in narrow minded patient groups.

Are you a business person who has a long commute to work everyday by rail? Do you spend at least £400 on your rail travel per week?

Then why not look at the "All lines rover" that is available?

For 7 days it costs (see details here):

STANDARD CLASS £430

FIRST CLASS £650

For 14 days it costs (see details here):

STANDARD CLASS £650

FIRST CLASS £990

(concessions are also available for travellers with a Disabled Person Railcard or Senior Railcard)

There are VERY few restrictions to this ticket, in fact there are NO time (peak / off peak) restrictions and can be used on more operators than you may expect. Here's National Rail's list (please be sure to fully read any T&C's of tickets bought though, this is just a guide),

The All Line Rail Rover ticket allows unlimited travel on most National Rail services at any time for 14 consecutive days.

It does not include the charge for seat reservations, where payable.

It is valid for travel on the Caledonian Sleeper seater coach (reservations compulsory) or in a berth with payment of the appropriate supplement.

It is also valid on the Ffestiniog Railway.

The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow Express, TfL underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink, private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping service.

Additionally it is also not available for travel on Heathrow Connect services between Hayes & Harlington and Heathrow

National Rail Website

So there we go, any train, any time for 7 days or 14 days. It should be noted that many Staycationers like this rover as they have the freedom to mooch around the country for a fixed price.

Sometimes, just sometimes, the railway has a good offer!

Or a conscience?

I mean, take your average newspaper reporter.......... they operate using the barebones of a story and then have to spin it to suit the mood of the owner of that same newspaper.

Photographers, when taking a picture of a victim, take several in different poses to achieve the most forlorn (or disgusted).

Pic library bods when looking for images of a figure of hate look for the most unflattering images to influence the story.

And editors are interested in 2 simple things: "Will it sell?" and, "Will the owner approve?"

And yet they have the audacity to criticise others for how they live their lives?

You have to wonder if they can even see themselves in a mirror?

So, Manchester is home to the Conservative Party Conference. Makes a change from it being home to the Labour Party Conferences, although the leader of the Labour led Manchester City Council probably isn't that chuffed.

What I love most about it is how the delgates are arriving........ free travel passes.

It would seem that Greater Manchester TravelCards Ltd (GMTL) are issuing free travel passes for the entire Greater Manchester network to all delegates.

On the one hand I should be upset that taxpayers are contributing to the travel needs of political afficionados when I stil need to pay my bloody bus fare and live here!

On the other hand at least this completely removes the step of putting them on expenses! Every cloud.........