The right to delete data

I think it is a good move that people  have the right to get their data deleted of some databases, rather than things being kept forever. In Germany for example, the authorities delete court files after 30 years.

We have internet sites that archive websites without owner’s consent and any accidental publication can be seen online forever. It is not fruitful so far to write to these people because they just ignore your request to remove stuff from their site.

If you jot down a draft on paper, you can always bin it, but if its done on the Internet, your draft can be seen forever, even if it was not meant to be final and was actually wrong.

Bye blogging for now

Having had a chance to recuperate my damaged grey cells in the wonderful fresh air of a British country-retreat, I feel that I no longer can even afford the time to blog, once I return to my London home. As we can see, less and less local business is available to work for but the government has asked me to get a job. Incidentally, single parents make up the highest percentage of the unemployed people at the moment. That is because changed government regulations force single parents to sign on as unemployed as soon as their child turns 7.

Life has become so expensive that I cannot even afford the time to play Facebook games any longer because I have to spend my time finding work, doing money-saving tricks like making food myself instead of buying ready-meals.

By the way, I do not at all engage in any type of politics also because I cannot afford this any longer. I do not support any political figure unless they offer me paid work. So far I just walked down heels giving our leaflets, another price I cannot afford at the moment, being unemployed. Benefit recipients who are on the bread line should get free party memberships to allow democratic participation but the state doesn’t think that democracy is worth funding.

Blogging also takes a lot of time and I feel it is not the right media to spill out my often complex thoughts, which I only hint instead of explaining properly. So to avoid confusion, I won’t spill the thoughts any longer but instead try to do knitting, sewing and other crafts that help me save on household costs because we are being encouraged to save for our old age, which is approaching fast.

Quantitative Finance

is another catch phrase, I became aware of tonight, and it is most likely used by professional financiers. I don’t know the phrase but can imagine it deals with finance calculations based on measure. I thought about taxation for the last couple of weeks now but my unconventional style of writing and use of words probably doesn’t strike a chord with those university trained academics who think in boxes and use certain phrases. However, many routes get us to Rome, as my mother used to say.

Lately the moaning about taxes has become one of “the” more used fashion items of what one can complain about these days. A favourite is the Europe tax and also other taxes that some feel is a waste of money.

What would we do with our weekly rubbish collections, our roads maintained and our European Court of Human Rights, that undoubtedly swallows up a lot of Europa cash.

I think it is not the taxes that people moan about it’s the way taxes are collected and administered by people they have no relationship with, people and administrations that often change and tax payers think they are running away with our money.

Maybe the old-fashioned style of taxation had its days. I begin to think about the origins of taxation. When it was the monarch or local ruler of sorts who collected taxes and this ruler was in office for prolonged numbers of years and was personally responsible for the spending of the taxes and the success of his community. We used to live in a “follow-the-leader” type of world and those that followed the leader most devoted, probably lived best.  Our taxes had a meaning in that they were collected by the same ruler for many years and we had a personal relationship to those using our money. We felt more personally involved.

Today governemnts change often and other civil administrative bodies that are no longer responsible than their term in office decide what is happening with the cash.

The main difference between old-fashioned monarchs and today’s democratically elected chancellors and presidents is the length of office. One administration puts in one rule, another takes it off again and whoever makes the rules, how the money is spend, disappears after about 5 years, having cashed in their wages and getting a lump sum payment on their retirement.

The outcome of their policies is no longer their responsibility and that is the main change that no one is any more responsible for the decisions. Whether it leads to banking crashes, wars, business failures, it is no ones fault. When we had monarchs they could not use that escape route, they could not hide behind this getting out clause and that is when taxation had a useful effect because monarchs would be more careful in how to spend those taxes. Today we have anonymous bodies and administrations that collect taxes, spend them and we are not asked to give to the debate, which  policies our taxes finance. We merely vote in a group of people to govern us but what that government then decides is often a matter of the runaway train decision-making.

Like today with our Labour government, we had them now for a very long time and our economy is in ruins. Do they care? Not a lot, they just think well that’s a fine mess we left the Conservatives in and as soon as they get us back to health we can take the government over again and ruin it all. That is called Democracy and equal opportunity?  The principle of quantitative decision-making however doesn’t stop with finance, it is also prevalent in health care. We do not give inoculations just to a few, more susceptible to infection, we give it to all, to cover those few that really need it. Especially in the production of goods, it’s the more measure the better, let the cash tills ring, also the mor the merrier.

I have written in my paper “Slave to the Balance Sheet” about that and that is what we are we bow to financial calculations, quantitative numerical equations but cannot think of the personal need of people.

Quantitative calculations are the consequence of our animatistic need to reproduce and multiply, that is what we do with our money as well. We haven’t really overcome our breeding instincts and managed to contain the sheer accumulative reproduction. Wars are a mere result of over populating, it’s how we get rid of surplus people, if we would not have more children than we can comfortably accommodate we would never even dream of fighting. Indeed in some cultures having many sons that turn into soldiers, to send to war is the main reason to exist.

However honestly I think our western culture very much tries very hard to overcome this throw-away our surplus children way of life. In some countries, there are no birth certificates, some girls don’t even get names and dying is a normal expectation. We try very hard to add quality to each person but that type of equality brings different problems about how far to our resources stretch to reach all parts we try to reach. Each child now manifests itself with a bank account, they have something long-lasting for a life time, which means, once accepted in the financial world, one is wholly human and not just one of those half-humans, that cannot even get a bank account.

Yet the accumulative finance calculations banking is based on, are creating an enormous wealth gap, hence our interest rate stays at 1/2 percent, this does cut the wealth gap.  Another method to cut the wealth gap and stimulate the economy( independent of centrally collected monies), is pricing goods and services according to wealth. For someone with 10 million in the bank, paying 50 pence for a tin of beans, is easy peasy but for someone who has to cope with £20 a week for food, 50 pence is a lot of money. What we have though are farmers that need subsidies out of tax payers coffers to be able to plant and harvest those beans for us. We do everything through central systems and hence are no longer dependent on local economies, that’s why our economy is so bad at the moment. With this central system whole regions can die economically because the local culture has lost its ability to act on its own. We create pockets of consumers that rely on the products others make. Does that ring a bell?  Yet it is the question whether each geographical region should be in a place to act on the basis of their own products and labour to make sure the mental and physical health of the people there stays intact; but finance alone cannot cope with that task, yet finance regulates our daily lives and all other services are secondary to finance today.

I just watched a children’s program this morning and was shocked to see how a presenter took the Mickey out of Queen Victoria, that she was so overweight that she could only wear black sacks and that she didn’t get any exercise and always sat at her desk. I was very embarrassed that my child had to watch that, because in Queen Victoria’s times Britain had a well-functioning economy and was going up in the world, whilst today we have a Labour government and our economy is worst than ever. This just shows that today we do not cherish the lifelong  monarchs that made it a matter of personal pride to get Britain into governance, today we have elected Labour governments that run Britain into the ground. In the past Labour only ever got in for a term and could not do too much damage but this time, they have proved to us that they cannot do anything for the long term that is beneficial to us economically. We do miss this permanent long-lasting leadership that figurehead that we can look up to, a Royal family instead of an ever-changing body of ants in the House of Commons, ants that have lost the need to look after the Queen. Margaret Thatcher got that point very right when she remarked about being able to look up to someone who is there all the time and who knows more about the country than someone who just sits in a chair for 5 years and then counts their blessings. We need long-lasting responsible rulers instead of throw away governments that throw away our cash in useless investments and business decisions that throw away our autonomy along with it.

My remark of excess populations being used for wars of course clashes straightaway with anti-abortion campaigners who make big propaganda campaigns against restricting children. See this BBC article about a prominent US footballer.

I think it very much depends whether you are residing in a very large country with lots of space or an overcrowded inner-city with little space what your views about that are. I have seen such demos here in London though. I have also seen a lot of overcrowding. Of course the lady with the football star son has a very popular argument saying yes, but my child, that I was supposed to abort became a very talented super star. Even such arguments came up because a very popular composer, was it Bach or Beethoven, came for a poor large family and he brought lots of pleasure to the world over centuries.

I am not sure that such talent would only sprout in the circumstance of a poor large family or whether such talent would not have arisen in someone else. How individual is an individual and how much does talent depend on particular circumstance. Is the natural selection flexible or dependent on only one person and if that one person doesn’t get born, would the same talent appear in someone else. I suppose we can never find out this one? That is another reason to believe in God because science cannot answer all the questions.

No Family? No, No, No!!!

This Labour government excels from one extreme to another, more blanket solutions, which are in my view in breach of the Human Rights Act and discriminate against members of families.

Of course we all know the principle that the best qualified person should get a job that has to be properly advertised and if that best qualified person happens to be a family member of the person advertising the job then it would be discrimination to not allow an appointment on the basis of the family connection. This of course also applied to the current MP employing family members scandal.

On the other hand I am vehemently against the employment, engagement, use of family members “because” they are family members.

Sweet Caroline

magic circle painting by John William, 1886. I chosen this picture as most appropriate because Caroline Flint complains about the inner circle. Unfortunately I have no copyright to show a picture of the Blair babes.

"magic circle" painting by John William, 1886. I chosen this picture as most appropriate because Caroline Flint complains about the inner circle. Unfortunately I have no copyright to show a picture of the Blair babes.

Another New Labour woman that has become victim of the use and abuse regime in New Labour. Caroline Flint has recognised that a lot of Labour’s initial strength in fact came from the loyal women who stood by their men.

Poor old Hazel Blears often was forced to dance on hot coals and as the mumsy face of New Labour often juggled public opinion in their favour by giving policies a common sense flavour, a flavour that only a woman can sincerely project. There was no other logical reason to do something, Labour lets a woman appeal for calm to the nation.

The final straw came for Hazel Blears just before the EU elections and now finally Caroline Flint also has realised that New Labour’s drive for women politicians is not much more than integrating easy pawns for the Labour game on their side of the board.

Here in Bethnal Green Oona King was thrown to the wolves, ideally chosen I must admit by the policy makers because of her half-Jewish heritage, to support the Iraq war in a predominantly pro-Islam area. No wonder then that George Galloway had such an easy task to import his pro-Palestine and anti-Iraq message and got in.

Labour’s strategy wasn’t bad, I must admit that and I am good at strategy, in computer games at least.

Labour just thinks of itself, the political party, but forgets that such a party is always made up of people with ambitions and most of those people have actually good intentions when they join but then fall victim to the Stalinist agenda, but often realise it too late, what is happening there.

So firstly Labour chose the good-looking Tony Blair (he invented the Blair Babe) with public appeal to get into No 10, then simultaneously appealed to the radical element in Tower Hamlets by putting an MP that was bound to upset them but at the same time, working with an even more radical ex Labour member to come and attract their votes to integrate those into the Labour Party in the end because by now almost all former Respect Councillors have changed over to Labour. I am not sure though how much of this was planned or whether it was sheer coincidence.

Matter of fact is that all Respect councillors but one are either still Respect, a new strain of Respect, changed to Labour. Only one of them, Councillor  Ahmed Hussain changed to the Conservatives and I was a Labour member, briefly went to Respect but left quickly and am now in the Conservatives too.

Result the Tower Hamlets Labour leaders are busy to give the newly integrated former Respect members (now Labour Councillors) key posts in the cabinet. Labour does anything to keep the Labour flag flying over the Tower Hamlets town hall.

We however now see a shift in the voting pattern I predict whereby we, the Conservatives can count on more Asian voters because they are now starting to look through Labour’s and the socialist strategy, which is merely a cosmetic way to appeal to voters of all convictions but in the end, these mind-bending policies just run themselves to death.

It’s a win, win situation for the Conservatives and the people can only gain by voting for them.

Of course not all see Blair’s babes in the same favourable light as I do as the Scottish Sun today (Donald MacLeod) ridicules all those good women who allowed themselves to be drawn into the Labour spectacular as Blair’s witches.

Personally I could never get past the post in the Labour Party and I am glad I could not adapt myself enough to rise through the ranks there. I always followed my own initiative knowing that as a woman I always look up to men and that can be abused by some people if I let them. In that context I also see that Mrs Merkel in Germany does a very good job to keep politics on a friendlier level than probably a man could.

England is now almost completely blue according to the latest election results, see the map for yourselfs here.

No wonder Labour’s policies on all counts are bound to fail as their efforts strain nature, Labour tries to make everyone the same.  Not even Labour can go against God’s will.

Flip the Chameleon

Chameleon in Tanzanian mountains

Chameleon in Tanzanian mountains

When I changed political parties a few times in 2007, e.g. from Labour, to Respect, to Communist and then my final resting place became the Conservative Party the East London Advertiser awarded me the title of Chameleon of the year. I got ridiculed quite a lot from Labour Party members.

Now it seems Alistair Darling is having a similar signature (serial flipper) on his habitual flat changing. Well I live in mine since 1989 maybe Mr Darling should have tried changing political parties too instead of moving home so many times. Mr Darling has had 4 different properties as second home reports the Telegraph.

It seems changing homes is acceptable to New Labour as long as its done whilst one remains a member of the Labour Party.

John Gray has finally removed the offending piece

When I visited the John’s Labour Blog today, Mr John Gray has removed the blog complained about.  Pride has finally given in to sensible action. I am very pleased by this action from Mr Gray who finally has come round to helping me enjoy a relaxed bank holiday weekend.

A huge burden has been taken of my shoulders now.  I just hope now Mr Gray can apologise as well. Note the date and time that I have noticed that the blog is down.

Having recorded the evidence, the blog was up since 8 April 2007 and continually on display till 22 May 2009.

I have recorded the last cached web display via Google as 17 May 2009. Strangely enough I have not had an e-mail from Mr Gray explaining his decision and / or whether he plans to apologise to me. We shall see.

Just for summing up:

Der Spiegel has removed their article from Internet sale via their free archive

Private Eye has apologised

Mr Hilton had taken down his blog

Mr Gray took down his blog on 22 May 2007

Mr Osler removed my picture from his blog on order from Mr Justice Eady

Now the only hard liner who keeps up his misconceived blog about me is Mr Osler after Der Spiegel, Private Eye, Mr Hilton, Mr Gray have finally conceded that there is no way they can bring such associations for me. (Amended that Mr Osler has now also taken down his blog).

I am worried about that because Mr Osler strikes me as a pleasant person, a brilliant linguist who has had a distinguished career. Why risk his reputation for such an ill-conceived publication? It is not worth it Mr Osler. Why make a point of free speech on the basis of false and misconstrued facts? I shall e-mail Mr Osler again about this.

What worries me though is the cost. I applied for an Injunction for Mr Gray to remove the blog, which was heard on 18 May 2009 by Mr Justice Openshaw and declined. Mr Justice Openshaw commented though that the longer the piece is up the more compensation is due and that the case should go for trial.

He refused the injunction because a “partial” defence of fair comment and justification is offered. I was ordered to pay Mr Gray £100 costs.

Effect, Mr Gray has taken the words of Mr Justice Openshaw to heart and taken the piece down. I am worried now about my costs and shall see how we can progress from here.
Mr Gray did send me an e-mail late last night and I refuse to publish this as it is in my view libellous again. Mr Gray did not comment to this post here, so that’s his choice.

My dear expenses

Never mind the MP’s expenses just being on the dole is these days connected to plenty of accountability.

Just returned home from a nice day at the market to buy some fruit and found a letter in the post from the Department of Work and Pensions, requesting bank statements.

I printed out a big bunch of them and thought, not so different from being an MP after all, just getting Income Support is harsh enough. 

I don’t know who those people are that are always in the news for having ripped off the benefits system, certainly I am not one of those lucky enough to benefit from such mistakes.

Court fines v new spectacles

Anyone who knows me is aware that I am severely short-sighted, I even had to go to the Moorefields Eye hospital recently for problems with my sight.
What concerns me though that the court ordered me to pay costs at £100 to Mr Gray, instead of being able to purchase new spectatcles I now have to pay Mr Gray.

Mr Gray is an outspoken left-wing unionist and finds it very funny that I have to pay him my savings towards new spectacles that I so desperately need. Mr Gray recommended that the court punishes me for making an application.

Perhaps the court and Mr Gray think that if she can’t see she can’t bring her case through the court, that would be discrimination of the worst kind against a disabling condition of a person.

I am especially concerned that Mr Gray as a Unionist supports that persons are fined monies to pay to him instead of being able to purchase essential spectacles. Definitely never vote Labour, avoid the Unions.

I love to ride my bicycle

Map of the triangle that includes, Approach Road, Old Ford Road, Sewardstone Road, Victoria Park and names some local schools in the area

Map of the triangle that includes, Approach Road, Old Ford Road, Sewardstone Road, Victoria Park and names some local schools in the area

and yes, I used to do it for a living, when I could not get any other job, I signed up to be a cycle courier and I was 43 at the time and had 5 children, nevertheless I couriered around London, cycling 12 hours per day and carrying weights of up to 30kg on my back.

So I know how difficult it can be to go around London and to avoid riding on pavements. It is simply just the shortest route, especially when one has time pressures. Who can remember the famous pictures of Boris Johnson and David Cameron being caught out cycling in places where they should not be?

View Larger Map
In my local area, e.g. around Sewardstone Road, Approach Road, Old Ford Road, we get a fair amount of cycling on the pavement. People come from the park and continue across the zebra and on the pavement, especially so as the new boulders have been erected to stop a direct descending from the park into Approach Road.

But, as had been mentioned in a recent meeting on Parkview estate, parents bringing their children to Gatehouse School often cycle on pavements, through Parkview estate and not too slow neither. Just yesterday I witnesses a young boy with his father racing around the estate on the way to school.

We all love Gatehouse School as a most valuable addition to our local community and especially also as Gatehouse School now rents the hall from our local church. I know some parents there and had some dealings with them years ago about the fencing to stop local youngsters climbing over their wall to use the play equipment there.

On that point, we hope to improve play facilities in the area very soon and await approval that the play area behind Rosebery House can be revamped.

Back to cycling, I very much welcome the initiative to increase cycling rates but miss the travel infrastructure for this. Here in East London we usually have heavy traffic going in and out of London from cars, Sewardstone Road is especially busy and so is Old Ford that is very narrow.

I however do get alarmed when I walk along with my 4 year old and bikes are zooming past. When I remarked to a Gatehouse parent recently, I was called stupid. I don’t think it is necessary to lower the tone that much, at least, one could answer, I can understand your concern and we could make a working group on how to improve the pedestrian areas and or road to allow for easier cycling routes but nothing of the sort.

Both Approach Road and St James Avenue are very sleepy streets, with hardly any traffic and the path through Parkview estate is used by parents bringing their children to one of the 5 local schools in the morning. Maybe we could improve awareness to take care for cyclists not to alarm pedestrians as to their style of cycling, so that we all can use our footpaths in peace.

I personally disagree with the Mayor on the point of traffic in London. I feel it should be restricted to delivery vehicles and public transport and taxis and allow the rest of the city to become pedestrian areas. The density of traffic in London is alarming and the air quality a concern. I am rather green and to really encourage more cycling one has to reduce the street traffic from cars.

Cyclists, are in a category that doesn’t fit in either with cars or with pedestrians but they are doing the right thing and get my encouragement, but just not too fast on pavements when it can be avoided. The danger is that one is late one morning and realises how fast one can cycle to save time and then tends to cut that little bit of time to be even more economical with time planning and gets faster and faster each day.

If anyone is interested in a working group to improve the traffic infrastructure around East London, here Bethnal Green please get in touch. I wish to thank all parents from a local school who were kind enough to return my questionnaires about cycling on pavements.

I don’t think that our local cycling problem is an isolated one and that this needs addressing everywhere. Hope we can learn from the Dutch who got a great cycling culture.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 55,049 hits
%d bloggers like this: