Saturday, 13 October 2012
Take Your Pick
Can't, won't, but probably will, pay
Michael Yon - Stunning Letter
Is the IMF now recommending capital controls...?
Ruth Davidson's stoking up a political disaster
Young Nationalists
Remember Thalidomide?
Time limits, gender and abortion
Revealed at last: The Hunt - Bottomley link
Now she can write more novels
A late addition for readers in England: How the NHS was lost
Labels:
Take Your Pick
Friday, 12 October 2012
What Is A Nation?
Throughout the summer, during the Diamond Jubilee celebrations, the Olympics and now in the round of irritatingly dull party conferences, one word more than any other, has dripped off the lips of the desperate unionist politicians and that is 'nation'. Its use is an effort to show that the UK is 'the brand', but of course it's not.
I've always believed that Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Island are the four countries which make up the politically named Great Britain and Northern Ireland or the United Kingdom - take your pick. Scotland is not a sovereign state (as defined per Wiki) but, since devolution, it has a centralised government, so does that make it a semi-state?
| na·tion (n
n.
1.
a. A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
b. The territory occupied by such a group of people: All across the nation, people are voting their representatives out.
2. The government of a sovereign state.
3. A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language; a nationality:"Historically the Ukrainians are an ancient nation which has persisted and survived through terrible calamity" (Robert Conquest).
4.
a. A federation or tribe, especially one composed of Native Americans.
b. The territory occupied by such a federation or tribe.
|
The ambiguity of the use of nation is a tactical move from the unionists, so perhaps those in favour of independence should begin to call Scotland 'The country of Scotland'. Just to remind London we are different in many ways, just as Wales and Northern Ireland are too.
Not even the BBC - the bastion of unionism - can decide the definition of nation as you can see from the image.
Labels:
nation,
Scotland,
sovereign states,
UK
Thursday, 11 October 2012
At Long Last The EU Will Ban Mercury Fillings
In the 50s and 60s dentists filled the teeth of children with dental amalgam, the black/silver fillings which contain anywhere from 49 to 54 per cent mercury. Mercury fillings were first introduced 160 years ago when gold was the only other material available to fill dental cavities.
Toxic mercury vapours from these fillings are released into the oral cavity every time food is chewed or hot drinks consumed.
A single dental amalgam filling releases up to 15 micrograms of mercury per day and is the primary source of mercury exposure. That is over six times the amount anyone would get from eating mercury contaminated seafood.
For years it's been known mercury is a well known neurotoxin but dentists in the UK continue to use it, even when Scandinavian countries and Germany have forbidden its use in dentistry.
I've a mouth full of mercury fillings and pay private health insurance for my dental care, yet my dentist insists removing the fillings and replacing them with the modern, more expensive white filling is unnecessary. It wasn't until recently I discovered that not all dentists are trained in removing mercury fillings and I think that may be the reason mine is reluctant. The procedures taken by trained dentists when removing these filling is sufficient evidence of the dangers of mercury amalgam fillings.
When I questioned a retired dental surgeon friend yesterday - who uses the same dentist as me - about the continued use long after the dangers were discovered, his answer was, "Money. Amalgam fillings are cheap and the dentistry section of the NHS would have collapsed if a ban had been imposed earlier."
He went on to explain the mercury problem was why so many dental practitioners began to recommend their patients use private health insurance which would entitle them to better quality fillings. I asked him if he had decided to have his own amalgam fillings replaced and he said in recent years he has had a few replaced because the originals cracked, but although he would recommend younger generations give serious thought to replacements, being in his mid-70s was a little late to undergo such invasive treatment.
The EU has been debating the dangers of mercury for years and now it seems it intends to ban amalgam fillings. At long last. Regardless of the financial cost, Britain should have stopped using this toxic form of dentistry years ago when the evidence became indisputable.
Labels:
amalgam fillings,
dentistry,
mercury
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
Rewarding Failure
Image courtesy of Wikipedia
It wouldn't surprise me if you don't recognise Lin Homer (pictured); not many of us know what Whitehall and Holyrood mandarins look like as they tend to prefer to stay in the background and well out of range of the media.
Ms Homer was named by Richard Branson last month as one of the handful of officials at the Department of Transport whom his Virgin Rail team met during 2011 to voice concerns over the bid process for the West Coast rail franchise.
The compensation estimates for the fiasco range from £40m to £100m - all to be paid by the taxpayer.
The Department of Transport has now been described as 'not fit for purpose'.
It is not the first government department labelled 'not fit for purpose' and headed by Ms Homer. She became boss of Britain's immigration service in 2006 and was named chief executive of the new UKBA in 2008. During her 5-year reign, the UKBA and its predecessor were branded 'not fit for purpose' as millions of pounds were overpaid to asylum seekers and 460,000 untouched asylum claims were allowed to develop into a crippling backlog.
Ms Homer has very recently been moved to run HMRC on a salary of £170,000 complete with a secure pension pot worth more than £1.5m.
Douglas Carswell MP said:
“We seem to be governed by a clique of mandarins who bounce from one highly remunerated job in Whitehall to another and there doesn’t seem to be any proper democratic scrutiny as to whether they’ve done a good job in one role before they get the next one.”
There should be a process for dismissing ineffective civil servants, but these mandarins appear to be untouchable.
How much longer are the general public going to tolerate rewarding failure within government? There were protests about bankers receiving bonuses for little or no effort, but we keep silent about senior civil servants being quietly promoted although they have left behind a department in chaos. In that Ms Homer appears to excel.
source
The compensation estimates for the fiasco range from £40m to £100m - all to be paid by the taxpayer.
The Department of Transport has now been described as 'not fit for purpose'.
It is not the first government department labelled 'not fit for purpose' and headed by Ms Homer. She became boss of Britain's immigration service in 2006 and was named chief executive of the new UKBA in 2008. During her 5-year reign, the UKBA and its predecessor were branded 'not fit for purpose' as millions of pounds were overpaid to asylum seekers and 460,000 untouched asylum claims were allowed to develop into a crippling backlog.
Ms Homer has very recently been moved to run HMRC on a salary of £170,000 complete with a secure pension pot worth more than £1.5m.
Douglas Carswell MP said:
“We seem to be governed by a clique of mandarins who bounce from one highly remunerated job in Whitehall to another and there doesn’t seem to be any proper democratic scrutiny as to whether they’ve done a good job in one role before they get the next one.”
There should be a process for dismissing ineffective civil servants, but these mandarins appear to be untouchable.
How much longer are the general public going to tolerate rewarding failure within government? There were protests about bankers receiving bonuses for little or no effort, but we keep silent about senior civil servants being quietly promoted although they have left behind a department in chaos. In that Ms Homer appears to excel.
source
Labels:
Lin Homer,
West Coast rail,
Whitehall mandarins
Tuesday, 9 October 2012
Home Made Ice Cream Using Condensed Milk
Dr Rohen Kapur has kindly provided me with his own version of vanilla HaagenDaz ice cream. He says you can't taste the difference between his home made and the commercial product. Somehow I think his home made may be better, but I won't know until I try this.
Here's Rohen's recipe:
Three egg yolks,
A good quantity of demerara sugar about 4 dessert spoonfuls, 300 mls double cream and a tin of condensed milk along with a vanilla pod and a teaspoon of vanilla essence (the £5.50 vanilla extract in a brown bottle found in the supermarkets in the baking section)
A thermometer (You need the thermometer or your custard will become sweet scrambled eggs)
Method
Heat the cream and add the sugar and vanilla until starting to froth, let cool
Beat three egg yolks until they lighten in colour and then whilst stirring them pour your cream and sugar mix over them whilst stirring, make sure that the temp is not more than 50 degrees at this point ( remove vanilla pod) ( I use one that has been already used up and then just put them in a sugar container.
Once they have been mixed return the mixture to the hob and heat gently to 64 degrees Celsius This will make sure that the custard thickens and then take off heat and mix a tin of condensed milk in with the mixture, Mix well and then cool.
Once cool pour into suitable container and freeze
Tastes just like HaagenDaz Vanilla...
If you want strawberry ice cream miss out the vanilla and add enough strawberries to make the mixture pink (frozen work best apparently)
Labels:
condensed milk,
Food,
Ice Cream
Monday, 8 October 2012
Grannies, Childcare And Parenting
Last week two bloggers had a conversation on Twitter about childcare. It was started by Ellen who asked opinions about the plans for a National Parenting Strategy. The following tweets caught my attention:
I jumped in to support grandmothers because I know many parents would much rather have their own parents look after their children, when the necessity arises, rather than put them into a nursery.
Alison joined the conversation giving high praise to help provided to her childcare problems by her great grandparents.
Caron seemed shocked that I suggested mothers (or fathers) should look after their children full-time.
Caron and Ellen are intelligent women and mothers who have no doubt about what childcare facilities should be available for parents today. My question is should the taxpayer be paying for three and four year olds to attend a nursery for more than the current 475 hours a year? Can the country afford it without it being means tested?
Norway's childcare system is often held up as a prime example of excellent provision but unless we pay higher taxes will cannot fund similar care provision. Also, 'free' childcare in Norway is only given to single-parents after a thorough means test. Even after acceptance the parent must pay 30% of the cost.
Women welcomed the invention of the Pill some forty years ago. It was possibly the biggest breakthrough in female society for generations. The intention was that women could now safely plan their families and not leave conception to chance. At the time it was hoped it would reduce unwanted pregnancies and give women the opportunity to be successful in a career before they decided to have children. It's so much easier to return to a career which was a success.
Caron says 'nobody ever suggests men should give up their careers'. Oh yes they have. Women have been arguing this for generations with no success and that's simply because women physically give birth and give the initial nurturing.
As for work being more flexible - how about parents being more flexible? It's always the employer who is criticised. Employers have the upper hard where work is concerned; he who pays the piper and all that. Paid employment is available in the UK 24 hours a day and certain vocations operate on a 24 hour system - the biggest being the NHS. I set up my own tiny business when I was in desperate need of extra money and structured it around my family's needs. There's nothing more motivating than being broke and having a family who depend on you. My wee business was so successful I managed to sell it for a small sum after it had been operating for only 18 months.
I digress. Last week, in my post about the proposed National Parenting Strategy, I was ambivalent about the concept. Now I think it will be just another intrusion by the state into the lives of families. The success of National Family Centres has been well recorded and rather than introduce another overlapping tier into society, the money would be much better spent on the provision of more Family Centres for those parents who required assistance.
For those who manage to wind their way through the joys, trials and tribulations of parenthood my congratulations. Most of us get there eventually, as long as we remember our main aim is for our children to have better (not necessarily more) opportunities than we did in the 'dark ages'. The cost is accepting the responsibility for your children and not allowing the state to dictate your actions. They do too much of that already.
Caron says 'nobody ever suggests men should give up their careers'. Oh yes they have. Women have been arguing this for generations with no success and that's simply because women physically give birth and give the initial nurturing.
As for work being more flexible - how about parents being more flexible? It's always the employer who is criticised. Employers have the upper hard where work is concerned; he who pays the piper and all that. Paid employment is available in the UK 24 hours a day and certain vocations operate on a 24 hour system - the biggest being the NHS. I set up my own tiny business when I was in desperate need of extra money and structured it around my family's needs. There's nothing more motivating than being broke and having a family who depend on you. My wee business was so successful I managed to sell it for a small sum after it had been operating for only 18 months.
I digress. Last week, in my post about the proposed National Parenting Strategy, I was ambivalent about the concept. Now I think it will be just another intrusion by the state into the lives of families. The success of National Family Centres has been well recorded and rather than introduce another overlapping tier into society, the money would be much better spent on the provision of more Family Centres for those parents who required assistance.
For those who manage to wind their way through the joys, trials and tribulations of parenthood my congratulations. Most of us get there eventually, as long as we remember our main aim is for our children to have better (not necessarily more) opportunities than we did in the 'dark ages'. The cost is accepting the responsibility for your children and not allowing the state to dictate your actions. They do too much of that already.
Sunday, 7 October 2012
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)





