LA2UK life and times

The Death Knell for the British Pub

2009-08-26T15:28:00.003+01:00

How many times have you finished work, and gone for a pint before heading home? A drink with your mates or a 'sundowner' with your significant other.

The pub is the centre of community for most British villages, towns and cities. There are other 'centres', such as church, community centres, schools and local groups, maybe, but the pub is that one place where everyone gathers to meet friends or make new ones. All this is slowly dying. Our pubs are closing at an astonishing rate, with nothing in the pipeline to replace them.

This is not just about the closure of local business, although that is an issue too, but it is about the loss of a community centre, a home from home, for many people.

My local has just closed. This was a place that I met friends for a catch up and arranged to go with friends for nights out at the weekend. Now it is closed and people are displaced.

OK, why are pubs closing? That is a question that I've been unable to get a consistent answer to, but the one consistency is that the business could no longer support itself - trade having dropped off to a point where the business was running at a loss.

Why?

This is where answers are divided. There are a lot of reasons. Currently, the world is in a recession. The UK is in a recession. People are less able to afford as much luxury. With less people out, particularly at weekends, the businesses are suffering.

Another question then. Is the lack of people going out, all down to recession? Doubtful.

Changing trends, more restaurants, cheaper alcohol in supermarkets and the ban on smoking in public places are all likely contributors to the demise of socialising in pubs, but why and how did this all take place. In my opinion, they are all linked.

As the western world became more health conscious, spending time in smoky bars was considered less attractive to many, especially non-smokers. The pubs countered this by introducing non-smoking areas, or even completely non-smoking venues, and this was a good move, in my view, to give choice to everyone. It worked too. Pubs were busy, as they attracted the people who 'chose' that venue. Price was less important (pre recession) and facilities were taken more into consideration.

Then a couple of years ago, the world changed, and smoking was virtually outlawed, almost overnight. OK, a generalisation, but it paints the picture in my eyes.

People began staying home, inviting friends around. We can still smoke at home and the proof is there that where we could once smoke in pubs, we are now smoking at home and therefore drinking at home too. Supermarkets were the winners. Their cheaper prices, often under-cutting even the off-license, made perfect sense to those of us that wanted to enjoy a smoke with our pint.

What was not considered was what effect all this 'stay at home' socialising would have on our lovely pub culture. Pubs began closing one day per week, in some cases, or laying off staff to keep their heads above water in others. The customer base got less and less and although there was always the passing trade to keep things going, it was never going to replace the regular customers that had now stopped coming. The only way ahead was down hill.

Now, we are losing around 60 pubs every week in the UK. Last year, almost 30,000 people lost work because of this decision. There are at least a dozen pubs in my local area (Uxbridge / South Bucks) that have closed in the past year.

In my opinion, a disgraceful decision, badly implemented and impossible to maintain without further losses.

Long live personal choice.

PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK

Well, that's another fine mess you've got us into.....Nanny State

2009-03-06T12:34:00.000Z

How do I begin this one?
How do I write this post without fear of contradicting any previous entry?

Call it what you will, but it came to me like a bolt from the blue. Maybe I'm lagging behind the times but for me it was a revelation.

For a few years and more now, the population of the UK have had a bee in their bonnet surrounding the 'Nanny State' idea. Most of us at one time or another have thrown our arms up in the air and said something like 'just another barmy plan from the Nanny State'. Central government have taken it upon themselves to treat the population, at large, like children. We're warned about the dangers of this and prevented from doing that. For instance, all the little warnings we see on food, alcohol and tobacco (actually tobacco is no longer a little warning, it a graphic picture of the inside of a lung or lining of a throat), but the point is there. We are told how to behave, guided in our day to day existence by rules and regulation.

Many of these rules and regulations are restrictive in a social or health & safety arena, and as such, lend themselves to the idea of a nanny state as they remove the 'risk' of a certain individual making the wrong decision about his / her life. Some rules have become blended into legislation and so the line between nanny state and police state are blurred. Political correctness plays a part too.

Parents are scared to allow their children out of sight, especially at night, because of the risk of danger to the child firstly, but also a risk of themselves being caught up in legislation that might see them imprisoned for their childs' actions.

Responsible adults with children at home are in fear of having the smallest amount of alcohol incase they're viewed as being unfit parents.

CCTV cameras are posted EVERYWHERE to track our movements and keep an eye on what we're up to

Gov't agencies can consolidate information held about us on a variety of databases, to enable them to investigate individuals further than by using data held legitimately alone can do

The TV warns us to reduce / increase our GM, Salt, Sugar, Fat, Carbohydrates, Polyunsaturated Fat, Calories, Saturated Fats, Protein, Vitamins. Get your 5 a day.

An independent think tank, the Kings Fund, published a report in 2004 saying that most of the British public wanted a Nanny State. I say that is absolute rubbish. The report might be a representation of the 1000 people surveyed, but 1000 out of 60,000,000 is not representative in my view, not to any respectable proportion anyway.

The UK Gov't are acting like strict parents, telling us don't when what they should be doing is warning, providing information, giving us the tools to make informed decisions about our own lives.

What was the revelation then? What is all of this about?

I've spent a lot of time putting it in black and white, telling everyone I know, making the statements that everyone else spouts off, but the revelation I've had is that while the content of those statements is correct as far as I'm aware, it was the targetting that was incorrect.

It's is not the Government that are to blame.
The blame for the way this nation has become lies fairly and squarely at the door of every man and woman in the land. OK, more specifically, it is the fault of the 80s generation in particular, but the 70s and the 90s had their input too. Mainly it was my generation - the 80s school-leavers.

When I left school, the North East of England was a fairly depressing place. The region is a beautiful part of England, closer culturally to our Scot cousins than to our English brothers, and has so much to offer the world in ways too numerous to list here. The people are genuine, hospitable, hard-working. The countryside is beautiful, vast, varying and full of history. In 1982 when I left school and joined the RAF, the NE of England was an unemployed wasteland, closed down industry and depressed school-leavers. I wasn't the only one to leave the region for opportunities elsewhere.

All over the UK, people were in a migrating mood. The 1980s were a migration period for the British human species. Where before, most people were happy with living close to family because work was availalbe, following the collapse of industry, people were looking further afield for work. OK, that is not the fault of the people, but the natural course of events that followed most certainly is.

Let's take it back a couple of years, to my early 'teens, so we're talking 1976 onwards. 1976, the summer of heat, the drought, long hot days and water shortages. I have some great memories of that year, carefree, 11 years old, and I spent much of most of those summer days with my friends on our bikes, riding the 3 miles each way from our village to the coast, leaving our bikes on the beach while we swam in our jeans in the North Sea. Brrr!

Today, in 2009, I doubt this would be allowed.
Firstly, riding a push-bike along main roads, shared with cars, lorries, buses, would be unthinkable for an 11 year old today.
Then there's the unsupervised minors, on a beach, in the sea angle to look at, considering that every street corner and cubby is populated by child molesting wierdos, it would seem.
Of course, swimming without any life guard is an issue too. There were no lives to guard - it wasn't that kind of beach.
Swimming in the North Sea, just south of Newcastle, is not a recommended pursuit either, it's not exactly the Med.

All this shows is that opinions are vastly different today than they were 30 years ago. Those of us that are now into our 40s see the UK as a place where our freedoms have been curtailed, reduced, removed in some cases....

...and it is all our fault.

We grew up in a world where our parents had grown up, and their parents before them. Of course there was migration in the 60s, the 50s, the 40s and so on, industrial migration where whole families uprooted and moved county, or even country, to find work and accommodation in a new town, city or nation, but in the main, we grew up in our parents world, and they in theirs and so on. Because of this, traditions and cultural ways of life were passed down generation to generation. Tips for survival, if you like, were indoctrinated into us by the moral superiority of our elders. As we enter adulthood, we make our own way in the world, but still guided by the paternal instincts of our kin.

During the 80s, this process changed more than it had been affected at anytime hitherto. Speaking purely from the point of view of someone that grew up in NE England, but there seemed to be a huge shift in migration, and many young men, in particular, moved away to start elsewhere. Work, or lack of prospects more specifically, was the driver for this, but once it started, it seemed that it snowballed. Suddenly, there were a lot of people living outside of their comfort zone, having to truly fend for themselves with little or no parental guidance. As adults, we will like to depend on something.

The Government moved along too. New politicians came onto the scene, men and women who also had their roots in the 80s migration. Men and women who have seen the possible changes that can be made, and became involved in the political process themselves. The shift was complete.

Politicians spoke to us in our language, they courted us with the same emotions that had let us down, they began to replace the parental and community model that we had grown up with, but had left behind.

We allowed it to happen.
We allowed it to happen.

Freud said 'Tell me about your mother', and I used to laugh when I heard that. What has my mother to do with anything, I'd think. But it is so true. The guidance we would receive, be it good or bad, came from the family unit, and the extended family unit, then from interaction with friends and the rest of the human race in turn. By endorsing the mass individual migration of the 80s, we have destroyed the family unit and because of that, community is weaker, social interactions are fewer, social malpractice is on the rise.

Unfortunately, while recognising the errors of our ways, I can also see the path ahead, and it is not a pretty one. Things will become more restrictive, more prohibitive.

We are now seeing parents being sent to prison because a child has persistently avoided school. But parents are being unjustly accused of being unfit here. They are themselves a product of their world, and their world has not taught them the values that my world taught me. This is not the governments fault

We allowed it to happen.

Now, I'm not about to attempt to incite any kind of rioting here, and I am not a political antagonist, but I am a voice in my nation. We cannot allow this to happen any longer. Unfortunately, we cannot stop it by simply writing a blog, but my hope is that I can plant a seed, bring some emotion to the subject, start talking about it. We need to change direction.

I hate to think of the lost generation. They are the product of our mistakes, and that makes me feel absolutely heartbroken. There are too many broken promises living in their 20s, trying to make sense of a world from which they know nothing different, and it is not fair to them, nor to us, nor to the future generations that are to come.

Children abandoned by community have grown into adults that care nothing for community.

It is an alien concept to many

How do we begin? Oh dear,, I'm right back at the top again.
We begin by talking, reaching out, creating community.

But is that right? Community evolved over many generations. We destroyed it in one.
How can we put that right? Should we try? Is there any better way?

Humans are social animals. We need community. Let us make sure we generate the right kind of community, a physical, social and interactive human community and get our nation and our people, back on track.

The State of the Nation

2009-03-05T12:19:00.000Z

We've made it to March, another month of being broke, being chased by bailiffs, debtors and my mortgage company. Work doesn't pay enough or I spend too much, but one way or the other, March is going to be just the same as February (but 3 days longer) and January (but 3 degrees warmer)

2009 is nothing far removed from what was 2008, Labour are still telling us it's broken but they can fix it while allowing morale and economics to hit an all time low. We've had some new laws rushed in already and it is now illegal to photograph a member of the UK security services, armed forces or police that might lead to a breach of intelligence or help promote terrorist activity. I think that the breach of intelligence is the assumption that the British people will sit back and take much more of this crap.

It takes a lot for me to get involved in a demonstration; I have to feel real passion for a subject, but that is the problem with this country nowadays, there is no passion left. We are all just content with drifting along in what was a perfect little bubble of British security and financial wellbeing and what is now a mess of immigration policy, foreign workers, rising crime, diving morale standards and financial ruin for many people.

Gordon Brown made an impassioned speech to the US Congress on 4th March and he talked of anti-protectionism. I would agree if I thought it might be just a way for him to justify the influx of eastern European migratory workers. I agree with open borders, I agree with freedom of movement, hell, I even agree with the EU to a point, but not when either one, two or all of those freedoms of choice are compromised and my country becomes a wasteland of 'what was', building projects abandoned, businesses closing on a daily basis, unemployment rising to close to 1970s levels, and our ruling government, because that is what they are - a ruling body, not a GOVERNment at all, insisting on their regime of restrictive legislation, costing business more money than their failed economic boom years are costing now.

Keep on paying your taxes to keep the government coffers going because from a business point of view that one particular company board should take a long look at any forecast profit and loss and do something NOW to ensure it is still around to mop up the mess by year end.

We haven't had a revolution in this country for a long long time, and I for one am most certainly not advocating one now (for the record I'm not an activist, not an eco-warrior, not a political antagonist but I do think I'm a citizen of my country, and do believe in a democratic voice, do believe in the democratic process, but I do NOT believe that it is alive and well in this particular EU state). Is democracy alive and well anywhere in the EU today?

So, what has got my attention now? What compels me to put finger to keyboard and have another moan about GB Ltd, or UK PLC.

We've had the photography law changes which effectively bans anyone from carrying a camera in Central London, we've had the re-classification of Cannabis from C to B, we've prevented an EU minister, Geert Wilders from Holland, from entering the UK on grounds that he might incite a riot, homes are being repossessed, people are being thrown on the scrap heap.

We have long been saying - we, being the great unwashed, the popular majority, the great British public - for far too long that this country is too expensive. We have been riding the boom or bust gravy train thanks to the financiers running the country, and it has failed. It has rightly and royally failed us all. Our elected minority have failed the popular majority. It was never going to be boom or bust, just boom, a bit more boom, a great boom for some, a heck of a boom for a few, but overall, it was only ever going to be bust for the rest of us. That's exactly what has happened.

The vast injections of cash that we've witnessed, not just in the UK, but across the EU and US too, haven't worked. Throwing good money after bad, I think is the phrase I'd use, and all in an effort to save face, to avoid saying 'we were wrong'. Wind back the clock to the 1970s and we were in a similar position. The country's industry was in a terrible state, uneconomic and unprofitable, ready to collapse. In the 80s, the government made attempts to reform, to rationalise, to capitalise. Trim the fat and start again, but put businessmen in the place of governors, politicians, statesmen. Give capitalism a chance to flourish and the world will be a better place for everyone. That might be true if capitalism was a global ethic, but it is not.

All UK heavy industry was closed. All the mines, closed. All the shipyards, closed. All the steelworks, closed. Manufacturing, closed or sold on. The surge of call-centres during the 1990s brought some meaningless employment to some, but that was sold off to overseas 'we can do it cheaper than you' type countries. Again, the UK was too expensive.

It became so expensive that even manufacturing couldn't survive here. That should have been a sign. It probably was, but then the financiers just needed another few years to get their plans in order, get themselves to the top of the tree and retire on $m pensions and bonuses. Sod the lower ranks, those that have supported the pyramid, the public, other businesses.

I'm not saying it was pre-meditated, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. I'm not a business analyist, or financial whiz-kid, but we elected those people who are because they told us that they could make a difference, bring change from the dark years of the 70s. We believed the rhetoric. Many of us didn't understand it, but we thought they must know what they're doing and let them get on with it. Those who didn't let them get on were arrested, imprisoned, corrected!

No, not in the UK, you might be thinking, not in England, the free land of human rights and liberation. Not in my England.

Poll tax riots
Toxteth
Brixton
Coal Miners strikes
Ship yard strikes
Rise of the BNP and National Front

All throughout the 1980s there were public demonstrations of dissatisfaction. People were arrested, imprisoned and corrected.

We don't need riots, strikes or political fronts to incite either of, but we do need a sense of nationalism, irrespective of what Gordon Brown told the US congress yesterday. We need a nationial pride, (not a BNP pride but a genuine, national, proud to be British, pride).

I don't want to go back to the 1970s, it was a depressing time, and I was only 6 to 15 during that decade, but I think we need to look back to how things were run then, how things are done now, and learn the lessons of the mistakes we've made; the mistakes a succession of governments have made not just in the UK, but the wider EU and globally. Finances were seen as a way forward. London became a financial capital on a global scale. Paris, Frankfurt, New York, Tokyo, Singapore all flourished under financial targets and bonuses. Industry was 'farmed' out to less financially advanced countries and so made cheaper for the financiers to get rich from.

We live in a global world; a global economy, we're told; a global village, and I'm all in favour of commonolising the peoples of our planet while celebrating diversity of culture, but not at the price of our national pride, please.

Britain, a world leader in engineering
Britain, a world leader in auto-mechanics
Britain, a world leader in manufacturing

Britain, importer of raw materials and exporter of quality goods to the world

Our aircraft industries, shipbuilding, mining, steel; all gone
Our last remaining, one, single threaded industry was all that kept the wolf from the channel ports (and I understand they're going to reintroduce that old foe to the Scottish Highlands) and that has now collapsed.

The Bank of England has lowered interest rates
The Government has injected millions of our tax-pounds into the banking system
There are few options left, but a lot of lessons to learn.

Now, the media is full of this 'quantatitive easing' process where they effectively create new money from 'thin air'. A license to print money. Essentially, the Bank of England can purchase Government Bonds, thereby injecting funds into the system. It effectively devalues the currency but born out of the 80s and 90s business speak, quantatitive easing sounds more friendly and less risky than devaluation of the pound.

Over the past 3 decades, we have seen a steady but manageable increase in costs and earnings, until it all went wrong. Greed caused this, nothing more or less than basic human greed. We became a regulatory culture, but the regulation was aimed in the wrong places. We should have been regulating our one and only industry, rather than allowing them to regulate our lives.

It is time for the table to turn. Again, for the record, I'm not attempting to incite a riot or start a revolution, but a revolution is what is needed - turning the events of the past into a road to recovery for our future.

The people of this country are unhappy. Everyone I speak to has something to say about what is wrong. Churchill once said you can please all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot please all of the people all of the time, and that statement is so pure common sense that it should be at the head of every email our ministers send to each other. But then, it is time for some new ministers. It is time we had a rethink of what is important. Being a world leader is all well and good, but only for the right reasons.

Life is about being happy. Have we forgotten that? Life is about making others happy. Did we ever learn that? Life is about spending your 20, 30, 40, 80 or 100 years on this earth as productive for yourself and your loved ones as is humanly possible. Productive in a spiritual and personal sense, not a corporate global economy sense.

I said in a previous post, look after yourself, your partner and family, your friends, colleagues and co-workers and the rest of humanity, in that order. Do it. Work to live instead of living to work.

Scrap the various restrictive laws that have been put in place, scrap all the taxes that have been imposed unnecessarily, scrap the policy of telling people how to run their lives, and begin governing this great country, begin doing the job you were elected to do. Begin protecting the citizens of this nation and doing what is needed to make them happy to be part of this UK plc, make us proud to call ourselves British.

Scrap the council tax
Impose a fair and accountable income tax - a straight and linear tax based on earnings
Scrap all the additional mini-taxes for home owners, HIPs and so on
Allow freedom of choice for our individual lives
Stop politically rousing sound-bytes like 'British jobs for British people'. Jobs should be awarded on merit, not nationality.

Let's lead the world again. GB should be able to show the way as we used to do. GB should be able to set an example on recovery that the world can agree with, admire and follow. The first step is to have a happy population. If the people are happy the country is happy.

The police have stated that they are worried that Summer 2009 is going to be a summer of discontent here in the UK, and London in particular, but I guess all of the major cities are included here. The worry is that summer rioting might be the worst seen since the poll-tax riots and the end of the 20th Century.

For the sake of everyone in the UK, British or otherwise, please please please can the government just open their eyes and see that the electorate are fed up with you all lying, cheating and talking your way out of trouble. We are sick to the back teeth of listening to the rhetoric. We are bored to absolute misery hearing messages of hope, recovery, and apparent u-turning of opinion - again, the benefit of hindsight. We need solutions and we need immediate results now if you are ever to prove that it is worth keeping you in office.

We cannot wait 5 years, we cannot wait 5 minutes. We need fast, decisive, immediate action and we need it now, 5th March 2009.

Our businesses are collapsing. Our people are disillusioned. How long before the ultimate collapse - society? I don't want to be around when that happens.

Bring back the happiness. Allow the little pleasures in life. Lower income tax and scrap council tax. Stop regulating our lives and start regulating the business of running the country.

Let us have more of the money we earn to spend. That's the way to re inject money into the economy. British pubs are empty, devoid of any atmosphere, cold and heartless, 'clean' and 'tidy'. I'm not against that last bit, but pubs are closing hand over fist now, not in a small amount due to the cost of going out versus that of staying at home and the ban on smoking. Get a turn around of social culture, get people going back into the pub again, allow the venue owner to decide if smoking is allowed or not and provide selective legislative cover for those venues who decide to keep the ban, and see the difference.

Get rid of all this draconian legislation on restriction and control, and lift the mood of the nation overnight. Get the people on side and the rest will be much easier to accomplish.

It's the end of Q1/09, there are 3 more to go before Christmas. If they do it right, I might be able to afford clothing and food for my family and maybe, just maybe, to buy my them some presents this year.

Fingers are crossed xXx Steve xXx

Drug culture and classification

2009-02-23T12:01:00.000Z

In February 2009, the British Government received a report that they commissioned into the classification of drugs, specifically Cannabis, and decided that a trial period where the drug had been de-classified from Class-B to Class-C was to come to and end. Subsequently, the drug was now to be re-classified back to Class-B again. The decision caused much public debate and news reporting.

The BBC, through its editors blog feature of the BBC News website, opened a discussion group on the subject, which although aimed specifically at the cannabis question, received responses from all areas of public opinion on all matters of drug use. Opinions were wide ranging and covered a variety of scenarios, but I'd suggest that the majority of opinion from the BBC public was one of dissatisfaction with the decision as a whole.

There are always going to those who agree or disagree with an opinion, and if those people are putting across their sincere opinion without unfair influence, then I believe that this opinion should be considered, if not conceded. We are supposed to live in a democracy, are we not?

Drugs are illegal for a reason. That is what we are all told. That statement in itself is fundamentally flawed, because drugs are licensed and distributed by drug companies to the tune of £millions per day, globally. Of course, the reference is to illegal drugs, and they're illegal because . . . well . . . because . . . they're illegal drugs right?

There is a stigma surrounding the 'legal' and 'illegal' status of pretty much everything in life. The authorities say that illegal drugs help to fund the criminal world, and more recently, terrorism. If tobacco were banned tomorrow, the government would doubtless tell us that illegal drugs were used as a means to fund tobacco smuggling.

Both tobacco and cannabis are natural. Admittedly, smoking the dried leaves and buds of those plants is not 'natural', but then neither is slicing the back-end from a cow, frying it, and eating it with fried onions. Humans have a history of adapting their surroundings to suit their needs just as much as we have adapted to our surroundings.

What we need to consider is this. Why do we use drugs?
From the earliest medicinal drugs, the purpose has been to make us better, or at least to make us feel better. Not all pharmaceutical drugs actually make us better - some just 'hide' the effects of what's making us ill so that the body can fix itself - so they make us 'feel' better. Think painkillers or anti-inflamatories for instance. They don't fix the problem, they help the body adjust to help itself.

Another thing we need to consider is this. Why are some drugs illegal?
All drugs that are developed have to undergo strict testing and trials before they can even be considered for full deployment across the public domain. From there they are distributed to pharmacies and drug stores, and some can be purchased over the counter at non-pharmaceutical outlets, while others are strictly controlled by prescription only. Dosages are monitored and calculated within strict guidelines issued by central government, following intense study and scrutiny by official bodies or working groups made up of professionals in that specific field. Those professionals are considered to be an authoritative source of information, data, opinion and procedure for dealing with that particular substance.

Let us look at the outcome of the report given by the working group, assigned by the government, to look into the effects of cannabis and whether a re-classification was necessary. The group published a report following the governments decision to downgrade cannabis from Class-B to Class-C. The downgrading was done as a trial, and the panel of professionals were commissioned to investigate the effects of the drug, and to deliver recommendations to the government as to further courses of action necessary.

The government trial came to an end, and they reclassified the drug to Class-B again, which has caused this particular discussion in various media. The one single pertinent point is that the commissioned working group assigned this task by the government did not conclude that any recommendations should be made to reclassify this drug. In fact, they went further, to say that they did not see any reason to reclassify the drug at all. What was the point of spending all that money on a panel of experts to completely ignore their findings?

I will admit that all drugs have an effect. A drug that has no effect is called a placebo - in fact it is not a drug at all in that sense. Effects can be productive or detrimental. Effects can be pleasure or relief. Effects can be eradication or enhancement. Effects can be multiples of any, all or many other symptoms.

The point is that the law is not consistent. It either needs to be tightened considerably, or relaxed entirely, and it needs to be done across the board to level the drug playing field.

It cannot be denied that drugs, whether legal or illegal, have an effect on the mind or body. Those used for pharmaceutical purposes are licensed to do us some good, but it can be argued that recreational drugs do an element of good too. Their popularity throughout the ages is testament to that, even if the damage done is outweighed by the good feeling. That is the personal choice of the person who uses that drug.

It seems to me that drugs that are used for recreational purposes are banned on the basis that they are mind altering substances. Let us consider mind altering for a moment.

An altered state of mind - a change of mind?
People have altered states of mind all day every day - moods.
Go have a lunchtime beer and then try to concentrate on your work all afternoon.
Have a few beers in the pub in the evening, then drive home - bad idea.

We have out of date laws, not just in the UK, but worldwide on this particular subject. Alcohol and tobacco are legal drugs of choice for many people. Caffeine in tea and coffee is also a drug. Amyl Nitrate is sold in the UK and used by millions, completely legally. All completely legally, subject to some certain usage laws; drinking and driving for instance. The adult population is given the choice, and some rules to abide by, but in the main, these drugs are regulated to allow consumption within those parameters. Why not all drugs?

We know that alcohol causes liver damage, brain damage and other related conditions with moderate use. Not excessive use, but moderate use.

We know that tobacco causes lung damage, throat damage and other related conditions with minimal use - not even excessive use in this case, but minimal use.

It is being said more and more that caffeine is responsible for certain brain conditions and damage there is being addressed by the removal of the drug from coffee and tea, but it is the consumer choice whether they want decaffeinated or regular.

Amyl Nitrate causes brain damage, and a warning is printed on the label advising that it should not be inhaled directly from the bottle - I've never seen it used any other way to be perfectly honest.

We are presented with various substances in health food stores that promote 'natural' remedies and the 'natural high' is being promoted as a herbal alternative to the illegal drug problem. What is unnatural about cannabis, cocaine or heroin. Each one is plant derived.

OK - I'll stop right there - I am not advocating the promotion of heroin. Let me make that absolutely clear, but I am including all illegal drugs in this post, and so naturally, I am considering heroin in that context.

Back to the top then - governments have used the 'drugs are responsible for funding crime and terrorism' style comments to advocate the illegality of certain recreational drugs for decades.

If this is the case, and use of the drug in question causes damage, then I see it as no different from alcohol, tobacco and caffeine. If those three drugs were made to be illegal drugs tomorrow, the supply of those drugs would be driven underground. We are already seeing the smuggling of alcohol and tobacco into the UK from cheaper sources, some from legitimate outlets and others from black market sources. Even some UK retailers have been reported for selling contraband stock.

Making cannabis the same as other class B substances is wrong. Plain and simply wrong. It may as well be class A and have done with it. It is the illegality of the drug that creates the initial attraction. Why is it illegal? What does it do that is so good? That is the way people think. What does it do that is so good? Remove the illegal status from the drug and immediately, it is levelled to the same as any other drug on the market. Most of the population and for sure those who use it would admit that it is only the 'illegal' tag carried by such a drug that forms their opinion of it anyway. Being an illegal drug removes it from the whole process of licensing and legitimate production, meaning that anyone with any knowledge of the business can produce the drug to whatever level of quality they like, or more likely, to whatever level of quality they are able.

Other drugs, such as cocaine and heroin are cut down with all sorts of substances, none of which are checked, controlled or delivered through any quality control checks whatsoever. I'd like to suggest that more cannabis has been consumed in the UK so far this year, 2009, than aspirin.

All drugs should be regulated. All drugs should be licensed. In fact, if you dig deep enough you will find that all drugs are already licensed, regulated and in use in medical facilities nationwide. Heroin is available under prescription, and is used as a pain treatment in extreme cases. Cocaine was used by dentists until quite recently, and I doubt it has been completely removed from the shelves in one form or another. So, the point here really, is down to personal choice.

The population of this country should be allowed to choose. I chose to drink alcohol when I was around 14 years old - illegal for me to do so at the time, but I'm 43 now, so I think I can safely say I got away with that one. I've been smoking tobacco since around the same time, and still do, although there are fewer and fewer places I'm allowed to do so.

License the production and distribution of recreational drugs, with an element of control applied, and allow the public to decide if they want to use it or not, rather than making every user an automatic criminal. There would be revenue associated with it, and that revenue would be directed away from the current criminal fraternity.

I won't drive my car if I've had a drink. If I intend to drive my car, I won't have a drink. I'm an adult. I make informed choices. Let us all make the choice.

To some, particularly children, illegal is attractive. Some people never grow up, and illegal is always attractive. Remove the illegality from their lives, and those activities lose their appeal.

I realise that this does not address the issue of addiction, but that is a whole new subject, and nothing I've listed in this post is immune from that particular topic.

Here's hoping for a free and democratic world, where the people have the choice.

2009 - time for change?

2009-01-09T15:03:00.002Z

Dear readers,

I don't want to be a doom and gloom merchant, so I hope that is not how things come across, but as a member of this community - race - species - I'm becoming more and more sceptical of the world around us.

Around 2200 years ago, there was a surge of activity out of a city called Rome. They had evolved into an ordered society, created the structure that people need to support their lives. We call it community, from the word 'commune' or social / habitual gathering. The structure that the Romans created, which was in turn based on the model derived over time by the Achaeans, Ionians, Dorians and Aeolians (evenually becoming the Greek Empire), is the same basic structure of society that we consider the model of the 'modern' world today.

Those with influence, money or often by genealogy, would be drawn into politics or the military or both. The Senate collected these policy makers in one place, and as democracy evolved, these would become elected members whose role was to represent the common people for the good of their community, town, city, state, EMPIRE!!!

There is a fine line between power for the country and power for the common good. What is more pertinent? Nationalists would conclude that the good of the country comes first. Evolutionist, maybe, or maybe those with higher ideals, might argue that the common good - the good of humanity is a higher ideal.

My philosophy in life is, and will always be, live life for you, your way, for your happiness, but with the caveat of being to the benefit of your family, your friends, your acquaintences, your colleagues and co-workers and to the rest of humanity in that order.

The idea of the Roman and Greek Empires were of a common good, but the ideal used to get there was often persecution and forced change. What has changed today?

Factions in our world would force their ideals on those that do not subscribe to them. I am not pointing this remark in any one direction, but in all directions. Life is for living, not for fighting. Life is a wonderful one-off opportunity for each and every man, woman and child on this earth. We spend too much time opinionating about others. Why? Because the propogators of opinion demand we think that way.

I've travelled our world extensively, luckily because I have a job that facilitates such activity, and I applaude the difference around our planet. I applaude the cultural diversity of people, but moreso, I applaude the individualism of the human character. Why is this not nurtured?

I respect and understand the need for common ideals - it is the basis of society as we know it, and was started by the Greek and Roman leaders to bring their neighbours into line. As their Empires grew, so new neighbours became targets for the oppression. Some succumbed graciously, some felt a need to fight. Therein lies the issue of difference of opinion. The difference is manifested as a national or cultural or political or religious ideal, but in fact, it is all propoganda. It is all enforced ideals handed down over generations of manipulative powerful policy makers. It is all a control mechanism.

The human race is wonderful, exciting and above all, concious of its' own existence. We imagine, we dream (granted, animals dream too), but it is the imaginative element of our conscience that is unique. As a species, we can do anything we please, within the bounds of some common laws. Those laws, granted, are also a control mechanism, but they are there for the 'common good'. Murder is illegal, rightly so. Theft of the property of another person is illegal, rightly so. These are the sorts of base laws I'm referring to, but outside of that, people should be free to choose their own path, destiny, life.

I understand and respect the need for government. The job of government is to protect the state to which they are elected. Maybe this is an old fashioned concept, and this is where we need to change our world.

We, the people of this planet are in charge. We have elected others to represent us, but not to control us. They are there to protect the 'common good', but it is up to each wonderful individual person on this earth to run their own lives, make their own decisions, decide their own fate, using some base laws to protect them and others in this process.

Don't hurt anyone - they have as much right to live as do you

....and hurt can be taken in many forms - this one base law is all that we need. The rest is down to us to put right.

We have come a long way in two millenia, since the 'modern age' began. We have achieved so much for such a short time. The developments made in construction to protect our people from the elements, technology, whether iT or the fabrication of tools to aid our development, transportation, from the invention of the wheel to ocean going galleons and more recently fuel powers luxury liners, and even our move into the realms of powered flight in the last 100 years is a remarkable achievement for a single species.

What else is possible? If we don't change our expectations, and stop fighting for idealistic goals that are neither realistic nor achievable, we will only move forward to our own destruction.

The world must change, and to do so, we much change our path. Change our expectations and the path will right itself.

Where do we go from here? I don't know, but if any of what I've written provokes thought or ideas in any one of the unique human brains out there, write back and let's make a difference now, before it's too late.

Drug Abuse and a Path to Prevention

2007-10-15T21:51:00.000+01:00

Today, October 15th, 2007, a senior police office in the UK; Wales to be accurate; announced that he was backing a plan to legalise Class A drugs in an attempt to control, and surely protect, those unfortunate enough to have become involved in such practice, and subsequently become addicted to a way of life which is slowly killing them.

Most, if not all, drug addicts will tell you that if they could, they'd quit. Saying 'quit' and carrying it out are two very very different acts.

I have a drug problem, and I'll openly admit it. I smoke tobacco. I drink alcohol. Without wanting to openly incriminate myself to the world, I have also 'dabbled' with some other, less socially acceptable substances, but have not, thankfully, ever become addicted to them in the way I've become so with regard to booze and fags.

I consider myself a strong willed person, and feel that if I put my mind to it, I could quit smoking. My alcohol intake is moderate and by no means a problem. I drink socially and with meals, but do not depend on it for any other reason.

These drugs are considered 'socially acceptable', although current legislation in the UK, and increasingly across Europe, the US and other parts of the world is making it less so. The danger is that tobacco, and to some regard, alcohol, is in danger of joining the ranks of Cannabis, Cocaine and maybe even Heroin as socially unacceptable. They are addictive, and with the law making it harder and harder to 'light up' in a social environment, means that eventually the entire 'social drug' scene will be driven underground.

Tobacco and alcohol, to my knowledge, are unclassified, unlike Cocaine and Heroin as Class A and Cannabis to a lesser extent.

I applaude this senior Police Officer, for not only bringing the discussion to the fore, but for his courage to put his name to the plan with the possible career repercussions it could bring him. Damaging to say the least, this man has shown bravery over common sense in a world that is increasingly being legislated against.

Putting cigarettes and booze to one side for the moment, the 'illegal' drugs have a number of problems associated with them that makes 'kicking the habit' more difficult. Apart from the addictive qualities of certain drugs, there is a Kudos associated with their use, peer pressure and the obvious pleasure they bring to the person partaking in the act.

The effect of legalising the supply of Class A drugs would not be endorsing their use. The purpose of this legislation would be to bring the drug world into the real world. Overnight, it would remove 'dirty' drugs from the street. It would, to a certain extent, remove the Kudos associated with obtaining and using drugs. Most importantly, it would significantly reduce the danger of overdose and death from people injecting substances that they have absolutely no idea what it contains, but only interested in the effect or satisfying the urge of addiction.

Going back to the first part of this post, most people addicted to Heroin would tell you that they 'want' to give up. Treatment for the withdrawal from Heroin is expensive, if not painful.

Proper withdrawal programs could be drawn up for addicts with medical grade drugs being prescribed and properly administered in gradually reduced doses to patients. Safe withdrawal under supervision would be much easier and the 'stigma' associated with being a user would be removed, albeit gradually.

Let us back Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom. Not to turn our nation into a country of drug users, but to help the law help those that are most at risk from addiction - never mind Keep Britain Tidy, but more a case of Get Britain Clean.

And of course, with the use of illegal drugs being reduced, the supply and demand chain would be broken down, and the police could be properly used to reduce real crime on the streets of our nation making it a safer place for ALL of us to live and enjoy.

My moan of the week - 14 July 2007

2007-07-14T10:53:00.000+01:00

Damp, positively wet in places and damn expensive. That's how I'd describe the UK these days.

OK, what link you may ask. Something I was talking about with my partner last night - that's what. We get taxed on this, taxed on that, blamed for all the things wrong with the climate, smokers, drivers, industry, commerce, leisure - it's all taxed and the claims that the reasons for this tax is to 'help the environment' Blah!!!!

The earth is evolving. The population is increasing. We are belching carbon monoxide into the atmosphere at a phenominal rate. All this to live.

I'm not an earth warrior, but am becoming increasingly political as I get older, or maybe just as my country becomes more intolerable to 'live' in.

The industrial revolution took place in England almost 2 centuries ago (correct me if I'm wrong there), and we've been developing technology to 'improve' life ever since. From manufacturing and construction, to transport and leisure - all positive industries that have improved our day to day life. Technology came along to enhance each of those with computerised manufacturing, automated transportation and the world of iT in leisure. But all this is shifting the balance of nature. All these man made things are affecting the natural balance of our planet. So, the fix, as the government sees it is to tax us. Raise prices. Make it more expensive to 'enjoy' the technology that WE have invented.

Animals are evolving. You get wild animals in urban areas now. Urbanised animals are seen as 'affected by man'. We have changed this planet. We have 'destroyed' it. Hang on, haven't we improved technology to improve our lives? Why should the people of the planet be taxed for the way our governments have squandered our money in their attempt to improve our lives. Why are we blamed for advancing our existence.

Invent the internal combustion engine, then make us pay hand over fist to enjoy it. Tax the fuel to run it. Tax the purchase of the vehicle itself. Tax the use of the vehicle on the road. Tax us again to use it on specific roads (tolls). Fine us for using it when we most need to (congestion charge). Tell us when and where we may use it, how fast we may drive it - what's next - how often we may start the engine.

Not just cars of course. All motor vehicles from agriculture to aeroplanes and motorbikes to ocean liners. Taxed and taxed and taxed again, because they belch atmosphere killing gases into the air, killing us, the flora and fauna, the very planet at the same time. The fix is to tax us? What BLAH!

If we have the technology to create these things in our 21st century world, then surely we have the technology to adapt. Fuels that don't emit the damaging gases or other residue into the environment. Ways to enjoy our life as we have created it without penalty. They say leisure is the new industry, but with all this tax on everything we do, there's no money or time left to enjoy this 'leisure'.

It's a 21st century world, let's apply the technology we have gained since the industrial revolution to fix what we have destroyed and adapt to what can be changed.

Surely, we, the 21st century human race, have the ability to enjoy our existence. Use the technology we have created to better our planet. Look forward, not back. Create new. What's gone is gone, but if we have done all this and nature is no longer in control, we must replace that control with our own intervention.

Climate change is natural. We have merely enhanced it, for good or bad, but surely we have the power and knowledge, technology and ability to create the fixes we need to create. It's the 21st century. Why are we still in the dark ages when it comes to running UK PLC.

A free country?

2007-06-19T13:57:00.000+01:00

England, part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, that place of freedom for the common man, the place where the Magna Carta was drawn up and signed, the political model for most of the free world is based on our constitution.

Modern Britain, the place were there are more don'ts than do's.

Have you ever seen signs like this?

No ball games - every young boy knows this one
No eating or drinking
No smoking
No swearing
Silence
No mobile phones
No exit
No no no no no

On the 1st July 2007, England will become the last country in the UK to 'embrace' the NO SMOKING law. The Republic of Ireland took this stance a couple of years earlier, Scotland was followed by Wales more recently, and England, the last bastion for smokers in the UK on Jul 1st.

We already have 'no drinking' (on the street) laws applied in some towns / cities, CCTV cameras everywhere, some talking cameras that shout at people who may drop litter, Gatso cameras on the roads catching speeding cars, speed bumps, automatic billing cameras for toll areas and congestion zones, computers sending out penalties for non-payment of Road Tax, cameras on every corner watching your every move. Mobile phones can be tracked when a call is made, Number Recognition Software can be used to spot cars and report positions, linked to the DVLA computer can then identify the owner and address of that vehicle. Small time criminals are 'tagged' so that their whereabouts can be traced, internet traffic is traced, phones can be tapped. Where will it end. They want us to have ID cards - what's the problem if you've got nothing to hide? HIDE? In this country you'd need to burrow 6 feet underground to hide.

Now we cannot smoke in any enclosed public building. Enclosed is defined as having more than 1 supporting wall and a roof. Building includes vehicles, pubs, clubs, restaurants, shops or the workplace. Now, I agree with certain aspects of say in shops, but as for bars and restaurants, that should be down to the venue owner, not legislation. As an adult, I decided to drink alcohol and smoke tobacco - mostly at the same time. The government are now telling me that I cannot socialise with other smoking friends in a public bar and have a drink and a cigarette at the same time. Whatever happened to the bars with two separate areas. You used to have a bar and a lounge. Whatever happened to personal choice - if it allows smoking and you're offended by that, then go somewhere else. We do not need legislation to tell us when and where we can smoke, drink, breath, eat, go to the toilet etc.

These views are mine and should not be repeated for risk of being arrested by the thought police.

An introduction

2007-06-19T12:39:00.001+01:00

To the world I am one insignificant being who has plodded this planet for 41 years to date. Born in the NE of England in 1965, I grew from infant to boy to man in around 16 years. Nothing odd there - it was about the county average back then.

England - a green and pleasant land, they used to say. The NE of England was far from green back then, more black and grey and tones in between. Coal mining, Steel, Ship (Merchant) and Tank (Military) Building were the main industries. The coal mines are all closed, the steel works gone and the ship yards and tank factories are barely operating now.

With the loss of heavy industry, the sky cleared, patches of blue could be seen and occasionally the big bright orange heat ball could be seen in the southern sky. Leisure became the industry of choice in the region and today the NE of England enjoys more green and pleasant countryside than almost any other part of England.

People from there are known for their hospitality, friendliness and honesty. The language is composed of words from modern English, Anglo Saxon, Germanic, Skandinavian and the various Gallic / Celtic dialects that have been spoken on these shores over the millenia. It is one of, if not the only English accent that is classed as a regional dialect, as it contains many words not in common English use.

I love the NE of England, but, it seems, not enough to live there. I left when I was 16 to join the miliary, spending 7 years in the Royal Air Force. I was posted to Leuchars in Fife, Neatishead in Norfolk, Cosford in Shropshire, Coltishall in Norfolk, Brize Norton and Bampton Castle in Oxfordshire, as well as overseas posts in the Falkland Islands, Ascension Island, Germany, Cyprus and Belize. I like to visit the area now as a tourist - learning new and interesting facts about the place each time. I will always promote the place as the best region of England.

It was not always so. Northumbria was a Kingdom in its' own right, holding the land north of the River Humber northwards to the Scottish Border. Durham was annexed from Northumbria (Northumberland as it is today) and was administered by the Prince Bishops. More interesting facts can be found at http://www.northeastengland.talktalk.net/index.htm

Following on from my RAF days, I joined Thames Valley Police - a big mistake. This episode in my life gave me great insight but for all the wrong reasons. 'Nuff said.

I had another brief career as licensee of a Public House in West London for a few years before returning to my initial career path in Aviation related Communications.

I currently work for a company in West London that provides Telecommunication Services and Applications to the Air Transport Industry (ATI)

I live in Buckinghamshire, west of London