大象传媒

John Reid (Has anyone seen him of late?) the"Not fit for Purpose" Home Office Minister is again in serious troubles after recent revelations ... what happened to his trumpeted announcement "of give me 100 days !! "
These latest disclosures of another Home Office disastrous blunder reportedly puts unwarranted ex criminals on the loose to work with vulnerable children & others ....Blame for this deplorable mismanagement must be directed at Minister John Reid, thus his position is absolutely untenable! .... or allegedly will Blair say as in the past of other Ministers "he has my total confidence"..ergo... s** the Electorate!

HOME OFFICE INCOMPETENCE Yet again the beleaguered Home Office is under the spotlight, this time thousands of files (27,000) have been left lying around in the Home Office, and not entered on the police computer. A "complete shambles", as Jeremy Paxman said, which raises issues about public protection.

Home Secretary John Reid apparently knew nothing about this today, when interviewed. But it's his job to know what's happening in the Home Office. We are told he is calling in the police and criminal records bureau tomorrow.

Sooner or later, someone has to get a grip on the Home Office and the Prison Service. It would help if the Prime Minister stopped changing his Home Secretary every 12 months or so, then (dare I suggest) someone could be held to account when things go wrong. However, irrespective of how long John Reid has been in office, he has got to take the rap.

This "latest example of Home Office incompetence" is sufficiently serious to warrant a Home Office Minister appearing on Newsnight. But, as is often the case, no-one was available for interview. "None of them wanted to put their head above the parapet" - but this is not acceptable, and I'm sure I'm not the only Newsnight listener who is weary of being told that no-one from Government is available for interview.

As well as discovering a method of developing daguerreotype (the first commercial photographic process 1839)
plates using light, Edmund Becquerel invented the photo-electric cell some time in the 1840's. (I think) Why has it taken so long to develop this technology?

I bet if you asked everyone in the Newsnight studios if they thought we would stop climate change 鈥� they would say 'no'. I bet if you went home and asked your husbands and wives they too would say no, too. So, why not report on what we're doing to prepare for a climate-changed world?

Indeed 鈥� what intellectual justification is there for focusing on something that is such a lost cause (ie reducing carbon emissions) whilst giving no coverage to the probable implications?

I have been doing my own bit to improve the environment and reduce CO2 emissions by campaigning against traffic calming over the past ten or more years. I sent the following text to the Lib-Dems just into the new year.

Perhaps you should check out the following link when considering your future transport and environment policy, its all about traffic calming.

I expect that I wont get a response as it is probably reporting the crime to the criminals who committed it.

It would appear that I was right about getting no reply from my original e-mail on 12/09/2006, both the other main parties responded positively to my recent communication regarding the environment. In one party it is being considered by a policy commission at the next meeting, but then its not a party exclusively for the super rich green nazi's and the foolish trendy ten bob fat cats like the Lib-Dem's appear to have become after electing Ming Campbell and abandoning the 50% top rate of tax. It is perhaps hardly surprising that I got no reply considering that stock market parasite Chris Hulne is now in charge of environment policy. Its a bit like putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank and can only result in yet more millions being stolen from the tax-payer to waste on grandiose schemes now already proven not to work like wind farms. The only sustainable energy source for the future is nuclear plus generation from incinerated household waste yet it appears that the Lib-Dem's have had whatever brains they ever had thoroughly washed by the eco-fascists.

I have actually regularly voted for you in the past but will never vote for you in the future if that's the response from a genuine attempt by a scientifically educated ordinary person to become involved in important party policy affecting the future prosperity of the country. I sounds like you are just the same as the bent green nazi's FoE who failed to reply on my letters about the adverse environmental impact of traffic calming over ten years ago.

Don't knock the Labour Party on its environment policy, it would appear that it is the one party actively looking at ways to reduce emissions without unfair taxation.

People used to think Yes Minister was a comedy. The civil service has house trained successive Home Secretaries to the man. It is entirely credible that the latest practice of allowing files on British overseas crimes to pile up on the office floor came as a surprise to the Minister. The civil service will probably claim that this was something they did not tell the Minister before because he didn't ask, or he didn't need to know.

When did we last hear a Minister call for heads to roll amongst civil servants for dereliction of duty, negligence, excess waste or incompetence?

The only episode of Yes Minister that New Labour seem to have understood was that in which Sir Humphrey had to agree a change because the Minister announced it on television. Nowadays we have frequent announcements and re-announcements of policy, but little follow up.

We have some accountability from Ministers, not a lot, but some. Its time Blair watched another episode of Yes Minister - that in which Minister Hacker threatened to withhold civil servant names from the honours list!

Your piece about climate change and technology was good, but once again left aviation and it's effects off the hook.
Any amount of geekism and carbon reduction will be completely overshadowed by the effects of flying if unchecked.... hence the irony of Tony Blair's recent New Year resolution to carry on flying.
The full effects of aviation, rarely reported in the media, are not simply the carbon emissions, although they are bad enough - the warming effect of CO2 emitted in the troposphere is 2.7 times the effect of CO2 emitted on the ground. One return flight to New York has the same effect, in damage, as leaving central heating on in the average house all year.

Chris Hull
Norwich

In regard to the "planet saving" technologies section of the program, I was as much stunned as anything by what I was watching.

After all the hassle over the disposal of nuclear waste, the novel approach of burying CO2 for great lengths of time can hardly be considered a "solution", surely? It sounds more like a cleverly aimed farce.

The guy who wanted to shoot sea water into the air to reflect sunlight via increased reflectivity of clouds - what the hell?? Rain is caused by water vapour condensing on the surface of tiny airborne particles (of e.g. dust). It would seem to me that even the slightest amount of crystallisation of salts in airborne water droplets would encourage rain? Also, rain is pretty much straightforward fresh water, no? If you start hurling tons of sea water into the atmosphere, it seems fairly logical to assume that this will come back down as salt-water rain. This isn't exactly going to help fresh water supplies, is corrosive, and god knows what else. Insane, surely?

The self-cooling office seemed like a fine idea - the gent showing off the advantages was very concise and knowledgeable. He didn't point out how exactly the office would be kept WARM though, in cooler months! Or indeed, how they intended to reduce the CO2 footprint caused by all the equipment that requires them to need an "air conditioning" effect in the first place. Odd, I feel.

The chap who invented the solar mirror seemed to be onto a good thing. He was, however criticised for inventing an "expensive way of boiling water". This comment is made by somebody with little understanding of global issues (I hope). Surely the more "expensive way of boiling water" is complete deforestation of the african, south american and indian subcontinent for firewood? People need to eat. To eat they generally need heat. These people will get that heat by whatever means necessary. A sustainable steel plant such as that is perfectly adequate for the need, is low maintenance and will last for decades if correctly looked after.

Again in reference to the last point and also the photovoltaic mechanisms discussed, solar power is fine in developed areas where delicate equipment can be secured and maintained. On the tops of suburban housing is one thing, but I really think at this stage of development in third world countries, it is a far-fetched concept to expect this kind of equipment to have any kind of short to medium term impact, especially considered against the costs.

Simple, adequate solutions are appropriate for certain area of lesser development (e.g. large areas of Africa). Addressing issues relating to construction and general energy consumption are more relevant elsewhere (e.g. Europe). Why the hell aren't the Govt. supporting some sort of education for the masses on these issues? The majority doesn't care or vote with its feet because it is more or less completely ignorant of the facts. This surely needs to change.

Reduction of carbon dioxide emission in the first world (and indeed elsewhere) should clearly be made a priority, not left to half-hearted, Heath-Robinson-style schemes of dodging the issue.

(End of rant)

Re: technical solutions to global warming how about reducing the speed limits by 10 mph across the board (after all road signs are a tried and tested technology!)- that will save fuel and emmissions; or enforcing the current limits with number plate recognition cameras.

Re: reflecting sunlight back into space; it may well come to that and probably as soon as possible. If we can stop the warming effect we might be able to prevent the natural feed back mechanisms (such as loss of polar ice or release of frozen methane) from kicking in and by ourselves enough time to develop the alternatives and mask the effects of the CO2 already release (which will take up to 200 years to leave the atmosphere).

What a mess, and Tony Blair can't even lead by suggesting that long distance holidays are something that it isn't practical to do without. Makes me wonder why I bother with the summer holidays in Cornwall when I could be jetting around the world like our concerned leader.

Last point: we live in a world which allows 20% of its people to go without basic needs like food, clean water or education. If we can't fix that now how likely is it that we will handle the same problems as the environment degrades over the next 50 years and the population increases by 3 billion. And we in Britain can't be bothered to drive a bit slower or do without the long distance holiday.

Climate change.
Getting people to pay for their carbon use, tax etc is stupidity. Environmental damage won't be any less just because we have to pay more to cause it. Der! But tax carbon fuels specifically to pay for research and deployment of renewables to create a governed transition from one to the other. If this money is ringfenced and visibly use in this way people will find the hardship justifyable.

Re. the self cooling office, I rented a house on the banks of the Congo in Kinshasa for several years, built at the end of the 19th century by British Baptist missionaries, which was similarly "air conditioned". It had three main rooms with windows front and back and a mesh ventilator in the middle of each ceiling. Above the ceiling was loft space covered by a corrugated iron roof - but the beauty of it was that the two longest sides of the roof didn't meet at the ridge. A a gap was left, covered by a curved corrugated tunnel the length of the ridge which meant the air was drawn in through the windows, through the ventilator and out of the roof - exactly the same principle as that oh so innovative office! This house was made in England, shipped out to the Congo and carried from the coast in 40 lb loads on the heads (presumably) of the faithful to be constructed on the banks of the river before Kinshasa existed. It is probably still there. Regards -
Gabrielle Harrington

In my opinion, the issue of climate change is still an open issue.
The Stern Review has been produced as a direct interpretation of the precautionary principle. (See page 21 of Environmental Science for Environmental Management by Timothy O'Riordan) This is the equivalent to "a stitch in time saves nine", stating that the cost of ignorance would be 20 times that of action in terms of GNP. This has the potential to justify imposing "environmental" taxes on the people of Britain, and impeding their quality of life and personal freedom, while other countries of the world, such as the US and China continue to emit huge quantities that dwarf the UK's 3% component. This is the real opinion of the qualified experts.
I do however not see inaction as an option. Oil is finite, technologies such as nuclear power need to be embraced. Thorium holds significant potential in a new design of fission nuclear reactor. (see Wikipedia) This would reduce meltdown risks and virtually eliminate waste, without relying on the unknown fusion technologies being developed at Iter that might not work or be commercially viable.
Grossly inefficient internal air travel provided by an industry that does not pay the same fuel tax as land based transport is surely a significant issue. Rail users are faced with fares several times that road users face. These issues are for freight as well as personal transport. Surely this issue needs addressing with priority before taxing road users to the hilt for every mile they drive. A reliable rail network with the capacity to transport the freight that currently clogs our roads in hgv's and increasingly in the air would be better for everyone. Environmental policies do not need to restrict freedom, and should improve lives in the way environmetal legislation has always done. Otherwise, forget it, people will not and should not accept such draconian and ineffective policies that lead to the unjustified detriment to the quality of their lives.

just thought i would mention the fact that George W today is poised to announce a 20,000 troop increase in iraq, complete madness. Forget about what his voters said at the mid term elections, on he goes on his crusade, dragging his poodle tony with him.

did anyone really think that he would take any notice of anyones opinion except his hardline neocon advisers? I see this as nothing but insane folly on his part. Rumsfeld apparently sent a memo to G W one day before his sacking, stating that he thought the course of action in iraq sould be one of a phased withdrawl from 55 us bases to 5 by july 07, with forxes only staying at the expressed consent of the provinces who wished them. he has since replaced all the people questioning his strategy in iraq/middle east with those backing his hard line.

one may ask oneself why he sent another aircraft carrier to the iranian gulf, and Since the Nov. 7 congressional elections, Bush Blair and Olmert have conducted a round-robin of meetings that on the surface seem to have little purpose. Olmert met privately with Bush on Nov. 13; Blair visited the White House on Dec. 7; and Blair conferred with Olmert in Israel on Dec. 18.

Sources say the three leaders are frantically seeking options for turning around their political fortunes as they face harsh judgments from history for their bloody and risky adventures in the Middle East.

But there is also a clock ticking. Blair, who now stands to go down in the annals of British history as 鈥淏ush鈥檚 poodle,鈥� is nearing the end of his tenure, having agreed under pressure from his Labour Party to step down in spring 2007.

So, if the Bush-Blair-Olmert triumvirate has any hope of accomplishing the neoconservative remaking of the Middle East, time is running out. Something dramatic must happen soon.

That something looks like it may include a rush to Armageddon with the threat to attack iran and possibly syria an all too real possibility.

Why does the Western Media still keep on buying the false assumption by the US that Al-Qaeda were involved in the Black Hawk incident(s) in Somalia in 1993?

Do we know better than the Somali civilians who were present in Mogadishu at the time?

That incident was purely a Somali affair spear-headed by the late War Lord Mohamed Farah Aidid.

There is also no evidence provided by the US that those people connected to the bombing of US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have actually been offered sanctuary in Somalia as alleged by the US authorities.

The suspects, (from their names and appearance), are more likely to be Swahili speaking East Africans and not Somali speakers, and will therefore find it linguistically difficult to live among the nomadic Somali tribes. Even more difficult is their survival in the harsh climatic conditions of the Semi-Arid and Arid regions of East Africa, settled by indigenous Somalis for Centuries.

What seems to have happened before and is happening again now, is that different interest groups and countries are 'finger-pointing' towards Somalia because it is the 'weakest-link' that can be accused easily. Since Somalia has had no central government for 16 years, it is an 'easy prey' if you like.

Kenya for its security failure in the 1998 Nairobi bombings, used Somalia as an easy scapegoat so as to avoid the US wrath.

Ethiopia on the other hand, never wants to see Somalia return to normality - therefore, unstable Somalia is in it's main interest.

Indeed, the Ethiopian government has been maliciously misinforming the US government since the mid 1990s by claiming the presence of Al-Qaida in Somalia.

But also after 11 September 2001, the various War Lords got their opportunity to "fix" each other by branding anyone that they disagreed with as "Terrorists" or "Al-Qaida" - Since they very well knew that one just needs to mention that to the US authorities, and quick action will follow without any prove.

The Somali Transitional Government (TNG) formed in Nairobi, Kenya, in 2004, has never been able to grab the mantle from the War Lords, and until last week were only confined to the Baidoa area. The TNG is also now playing the same game - the 'Al-Qaida card' - so that it can be placed on the throne by the US and its ally Ethiopia.

The current crises has been precipitated by the United States's fear of the rise of the Union of Islamic Courts in Somalia (UIC).

But those of us who are of ethnic Somali, and have been keenly following events in Somalia since its breakdown, and have relatives on the ground, know very well that this fear is unfounded. It is based on a false premise created by factors that I have already mentioned above.

The UIC was formed by a group of Clerics after years of civil war, bloodshed, and despair created by the War Lords. In the decade-and- half of the Somalia tragedy, they involved themselves very little with politics but provided very crucial and life saving charity work: mainly in health, food, education, and some semblance of law. The very vulnerable were able to survive thanks to their generosity amidst hopelessness.

But as the sufferring continued, and the TNG and War Lords were in a stalemate to form a central government, the UIC were asked by the people to involve themselves in politics as the people strongly believed that the success they showed in their Charity work will be replicated if they are in government. They did this with flying colours for within a short period of 6-8 months last year, they got rid of the War Lords, established law and order, and provided social and economic ammenities that were largely forgotten in the chaotic years.

This background truth is what is missing from the mainstream media!

11 . At 12:01 AM on 10 Jan 2007,
Michael McGuffie wrote:
Re: technical solutions to global warming how about reducing the speed limits by 10 mph across the board (after all road signs are a tried and tested technology!)- that will save fuel and emmissions; or enforcing the current limits with number plate recognition cameras.

Yet another brain dead eco-fascist idea which doesn't hold water in science. Driving a road vehicle is like attempting to fetch water in a bucket with a large hole in the bottom of it, the longer it takes you to get there the less water you end up with at the destination. Both petrol and diesel engines are only about 30% efficient and therefore increasing many speed limits within and up to about 70 Mph actually cuts pollution. perhaps you need to read the following link written by a motor vehicle technician.

Any increased tax on petroleum products disproportionately hits the poor and has minimal effect on the rich. It becomes more meaningful if the derived income is directed towards improved public transport provision and alternative technologies to reduce carbon take-up. A 鈥渨ise man鈥� panel (if this is possible in the UK) should be appointed to decide policy. With the present Chancellor this is unlikely to happen, he is too keen to keep hold of all the purse strings.

It appears to be accepted in the Stern report that exponential rise in air transport is inevitable. The Eddington report (commissioned by Gordon Brown and prepared by an ex CEO of British Airways) fully endorsed the expansion of Heathrow. Until the fallacy of this approach is appreciated we have no hope of alleviating the problem. Attempts should be made to reduce hydrocarbon consumption by air transport 鈥� not only by using larger and more fuel/cost efficient aircraft. The UK particularly is besotted by holidays abroad this should be curbed.

Without exception individuals one talks to are dismayed and frustrated by the stupidity and ineptitude of the government in all areas 鈥� Health, Iraq, Home office, Education, Social Services, IT services and the list is endless. The carbon issue is a further example and we will never address it satisfactorily with a government that is so incompetent in all it tackles 鈥� led by a Prime Minister who will continue to travel afar, confident that science and technology will find a solution! What stupidity 鈥� a C in general science GSCE would make that clear to him.

A very interesting Newsnight. JP seems somewhat rested and perhaps less "jaded". Why does he feel the Net is so contemptible? It jars, him being that way whilst one is watching him on RealPlayer.

Strange priorities how the Home Office has been failing to enter so many genuine foreign convictions on its computers whilst insanely pursuing having computer files finger prints, and DNA for every single person.

Who decided to term reports about technology "geek"? Newsnight's operations are fairly technical; is "geek" a pejorative term in your offices?

Is the government's response to global warming just hot air? Of course. Remember the PM flying out to New Zealand to address an environmental conference by video link, over the last few miles? He flys at the drop of a hat. He's even ordered a No10 airliner!

The reports on various carbon-fighting devices was excellent, until your reporter, Roger Harrabin (who must have burnt quite a bit of carbon fuels in his globe-trotting: London, Gujarat, California, Florida, Algeria, Watford, Edinburgh - why can you not use locals?), put them to a supercilious "expert", who rubbished most of them in ridiculous ways, that your reporter apparently accepted without question. Big schemes are out because they might distract from personal efforts, indeed! Solar dishes for school cooking are complicated and centralised; Oh yeah? Had he not seen the film? But the one I was looking forward to seeing, to remove carbon from the atmosphere, didn't seem to appear. What happened to it? Isn't that the ideal path? Interesting to concern for the cost of air-conditioning in offices, whilst the government is doing everything possible to make our homes hotter. I wonder what the sales of inefficient, noisy, imported home air-conditioning will be this summer? How will that fit promises to make all new homes zero-carbon-emitting"?

So why does milk undo all the good in polyphenols? Does the same go for all other milk products and other polyphenols?

Climate Change + US Military
As the two are in fact connected.

1)According to a review of a book by Dr Rosalie Bertell, "Earth the Latest Weapon of War" which appeared in "Resurgence", US miliatary experiments under the Star Wars project are a if not the major cause of global warming. In the 1960's high altitude nuclear tests have damaged the protective Van Allen belts and created new electromagnetic belts. Today HAARP - High Frequency Active Auroral Research Prog which works on the ionosphere making it bulge or cutting thro it can and may have destabilised our atmosphere; an installation in Alaska able to produce an electromagnetic field 60,000 times in XS of the Earth's own. And lots more. Asking the US to desist would be a major step forward.

2) What is the carbon cost of current military activity - replacing all the damaged infrastructure? Stopping ALL military activity would reduce carbon emissions.

3) Increased solar activity (check with NASA) is changing the climate on other planets - electromagnetic strengths and polarities, radiation etc. How much more can we do to compensate for this, if at all?

4)"Crazy" new energy sources like antigravity and zero point force should not be dismissed out of hand - there are books and websites on these using "suppressed" techology discovered by scientists like Tesla and Schauberger. Now is the time for some serious investigation.

Re the interview with Dr Stern discussing implementation of his suggested measures. I was surprised to hear him recommend that everyone should buy a Toyota Prius. A fascinating recent study in the US - the "Dust-to Dust" report looks at the overall energy cost to society of using a wide range of vehicles. People should read this report to see the excellent methodology used however the end result is that current hybrid cars are very expensive when the global environmental cost including manufacture, use, and disposal is considered. A Toyota Prius costs $3.25 a mile when considered in this way as compared to a simple conventional car such as a Ford Escort ( $0.57 per lifetime-mile)
Things are very complicated in the real world as opposed to the esoteric world of the Economist.

Climate Change

I wasn't very impressed with Stern, the man as he appeared in the interview. Doesn't anybody else think we are being manipulated - its been obvious to a lot of us for quite some years that climate change really is happening. So why NOW and why just because its "bad for business" - people losing their lives due to rising sea levels and the increase in earthquakes, landslides, hurricanes is more important than just lost British business!!

Apart from tackling the big causes first - airtravel, deforestation, war - shouldn't the government be pioneering alternatives for domestic scale heating/cooling and for transport, rather than the individual homeowner and car driver?

Pioneering technology is expensive and risky. The government is responsible for 40% of the economy and has a lot of buildings (offices, schools, hospitals etc) as well as vehicles. It also employs engineers and scientists to advise - I don't.

The taxpayer will pay in the end of course - as there is no-one else. But the govt is in a better position to try stuff out.

If the govt had taken climate change seriously 20 or even 10 years ago we would have a developed market and cost-effective alternatives right now.