we need to end super injunctions

The telegraph reports that John Hemming, a back-bench Liberal Democrat MP has revelead that Fred Goodwin the disgraced former boss of RBS has obtained an in juction. John Hemming said: "In a secret hearing Fred Goodwin has obtained a super-injunction preventing him being identified as a banker.

"Will the government have a debate or a statement on freedom of speech and whether there's one rule for the rich like Fred Goodwin and one rule for the poor?"

As a result of this west of westminster has started a pettition to David Cameron to us his full poweres to stop this injunction and remove hir rewards for failure. The text fo the pettion is below click it to go to the petition.

We the undersigned ask the government to strip Fred Goodwin of his Knighthood as he has damaged RBS and the economic welfare of this nation. Remove this gross injunction against telling the truth and if it is within government power remove his £200000 a year pension there should be no reward for failure especially the degree to which he failed creating hardship and suffering for many in this nation. This is important for the financial welfare of this country there should be rewards for success not failure. Fred Goodwin failed yet he still keeps his reward of a knighthood and 6 figure pension. This sets a terrible precedent and encourages incompetent behaviour from executives.

Alternative vote referendum

In two months time there will be a referendum on new voting systems. You can find out what is being voted for here and how the parties stand here.

Which way are you going to vote? I’m in favour as a step towards stronger democracy. Altough we need a non of the above option as well.

Light grilling on the One Show

Former Blue peter presenter and current One Show Co-Host Matt Baker really shocks the prime minister with his question "How do you sleep at night" take a look at the video below everyone is a little shocked. While it’s always nice to see TV personalities being tough with politicians it’s a shame he couldn't be a bit more focused with his question. The PM does deal with it quite well after the initial surprise i guess he was expecting only soft questions. It’s also a shame that he couldn't defend his policies better and instead takes the question literally. Still a bit of political amusement to brighten the day.

Attempts to privatise health care

Politics.co.uk reports on a worrying piece of legislation that would promote competition to the NHS and could end up privatizing health care in this country. This would further increase the level of middle managers who cost a lot but add no value to the patient. Quite possibly the best quote about this is from Dr Hamish Meldrum, chairman of council at the BMA "The role of the regulator should not be to enforce potentially damaging competition but to ensure comprehensive, high quality care and to protect patients” Regulators should not be there to promote one group over another they are there to ensure high standards nothing else. If a group needs to be promoted (i.e. private health companies) over another so that they are competing on an equal footing then there is something drastically wrong with that group.

Private health care is already competing and losing against the NHS it costs more and delivers the same because private companies have an greater obligation to shareholders than to customers (the patients) this legislation is just there to help prop up a business sector that is profitable enough anyway and worringly is a from of social engineering to make it easier bring in healthcare privatisation so we have a second rate system similar to the American model of health “care”.

Yellow journalism

Former Daily star reporter accuses the paper of yellow journalism. I am completely surprised that a low grade tabloid would resort to misinformation and demonization of a minority to increase sales. It really is time for some sort of honesty law to compel newspapers to tell the truth and present evidence for their stories or they have a good sized banner declering that they are infact writting fiction. No good comes from yellow journalism and all our papers practice it at some point to improve sales and revenue.

Big brother watch or Big Baby?

I recently came across a site that at first glance seemed very positive Big Brother Watch a site dedicated to fighting big brother the nanny state in general a fine principle. However they do seem to have that childish even hypocritical blind spot I often see in American politics in that they are unable to recognise the difference between public and private.
If you believe that CCTV in public is an invasion of privacy then you must also believe that people being able to see you with their own eyeballs in public is an invasion of your privacy. Ultimately how is this different from having a lot more police on the streets or someone reporting a crime they see happen in person? The only difference I see is that CCTV is more reliable as evidence whereas a skilful and deceitful lawyer can shred the best eyewitness testimony.
Also on the same site they have this article that is in favour of companies placing tracking cookies onto computers without asking, now that is Big Brother.
It’s this contradictory behaviour that means they end up looking as stupid as those green protestors who protested against the most fuel efficient ship in the world because it was also the biggest. Protest against genuine invasions of privacy not CCTV in a public place and don’t be in favour of genuine invasions of privacy as you cannot be taken seriously and end up looking like a plant to make Pro privacy advocates look bad and as a result Big Brother Watch, sadly can not be taken seriously.

Pension shakeup proposed

Iain Duncan smith is proposing reforms to the pension system, designed to simplify the system and encourage younger people to save for retirement. Mr Duncan Smith said: "We have to fundamentally simplify the system. And we have to make it crystal clear to young savers that it pays to save." The trouble with that statement is it does not pay to save as hardly any bank accounts pay much if any interest anymore and pensions offer an even worse return. This low to no interest payment is a deliberate policy to discourage saving and encourage spending to stimulate the economy.

Looking at my parents and the private pensions they have they have barely made any money and would have made near double this in ordinary bank accounts so investment is not a good option either as the investors take the lions share. Unless you are earning well above the national average it is not worth saving as you will have very little to show for it at the end. In addition it may not be possible to save anything at the moment as I have personally found out I now have spend the vast majority of my money on simply having somewhere to live and to get to work. I am unable to invest or save as there is little to no money spare after bills. Whilst it is laudable that the government wants to simplify pensions and save money. At the very least the government needs to help to make saving and investing possible before they make such changes to the pension scheme.