Time constraints and a realization that most of this is just waffle have led me to suspend this blog for the time being and just post on Before I Forget. Sport and news posts will be added here if I feel the urge.

Why do so many politicians wish to stamp their name across a department and install fundamental change with targets to institutions that aren't performing that badly. This week has seen the Government back down over its NHS reforms after failing to underestimate the public goodwill towards the institution. The cynic in me fears that they will press ahead with their ideas but by the backdoor with no fanfare. The point is that any large organization whether in the public or private sector is bound to be a bit flabby with room for improvement but to overhaul the whole system can only destroy the good that it does. With regard to the NHS targets are set and league tables drawn up to highlight underperforming hospitals similar to that with schools then we are told that we have a "choice" as to where we get treatment as well as where our children are educated.
   The trouble here is that this is an area where choice is not necessary - we simply want to be treated or taught to the best standard no matter where we are in the country in the local hospital or school. Having to travel a further 30 miles to a hospital that was a few places higher in the league table is not choice: It is failing to take responsibility for the services you provide. Politicians, like business leaders, feel that they must appear to be proactive so talk about cutting waste and improving efficiency as if previous managers were simply burning money to keep warm and never had their own cost cutting exercises.
   I work for a medium sized company that has been around for nearly 150 years and there have been a number of changes of ownership in the last few decades each time with a new idea on how they could save more money with mixed results (one before I started was particularly disastrous as they bought in cheap ingredients resulting in poorer quality product and less custom). Each time the upshot is that there tends to be fewer staff doing more work between them but there is only so far this and various updated time and motion practices can go (despite how earnestly the latter are studied with their Japanese terms).
   Similarly with the Health Service the major way of saving money is by employing less people and increasing the workload on those that remain which can only undermine morale as well as annoying patients (or clients or customers or whatever they choose to call them). Why would patients be annoyed? Surely they would benefit from a better service. But why would it be a better service with fewer resources? In the private sector the onus is on producing generic product A cheaper than company X which is all well and good until company Y comes along and produces it even more efficiently and cheaper. The problem is that for all the talk of choice we are having the number of options limited as we are left with a number of companies all producing Product A ever more efficiently rather than a variety of products and services that people may actually want.
   The NHS is one of the great institutions of this country like the BBC which whilst they do have their faults perform a great service and will own up to mistakes, often too freely in response to the slightest criticism. By contrast private companies will deny any wrongdoing for fear that their share price would suffer. League tables and targets do not help the public sector as the nature of tables means that someone must come top and someone bottom. In the case of the former that hospital or school may become oversubscribed and the latter can only be stigmatised. Rather inspectors should merely report on the potential failings of institutes and show where improvements are required. If the standard is so poor that the public would suffer from attending then drastic action would be necessary but until then a more laissez faire attitude would be better all round.

Perhaps it's the pessimist in me but despite the celebrations in Yemen Idon't think it's the end of the trouble just yet. I hope I am wrong but after initial jubilation at the relatively quick overthrow of the regimes in Tunisia and Egypt the "Arab Spring" has stalled somewhat. Bahrain has cracked down on protesters whilst Formula 1 prepare to welcome them back into the fold and initial speculation that it would be a matter of days, or a couple of weeks at most, before Gaddafi was overthrown the fighting in Libya continues.
   Whilst it is certainly difficult for Saleh to return to Yemen after he receives treatment his regime is still in power with his vice president assuming control. Much therefore depends on whether the protesters are happy enough to see the back of someone who ruled them for over 30 years or as is more likely wish to continue to press on and seek reforms. Hadi may have a bit of time to assess his position whilst Saleh recovers as he is effectively in a caretaker role and he will have to decide which way to handle things should Saleh remain in Saudi Arabia: Continue with the damaged regime and risk going the way of Saleh or bow to the protesters demands and not try to hang onto what he has not had and spare more bloodshed.

After safely negotiating the recent apocalypse I am still curious as to what motivation lies behind people's reaction to such pronouncements. Undoubtedly the preacher or whoever proclaiming The Rapture is coming is getting some publicity and I am sure that in some cases they may genuinely believe what they say. Publicity seekers are common enough and there is often some scam involved to raise some money, but the true believer must think he is sending out a warning to prepare for your fate. However, with a couple of days to go it seems a bit late for the condemned to make amends and only gives them an opportunity to mock when the inevitable non event occurs (or doesn't).
   In this case Harold Camping has had his moment of glory (again: he predicted the World's end to be in 1994 as well) although he is certainly not milking it as no one has seen him since the appointed time. The inevitable thought that he may have ended his own world as other cult leaders are wont to do does cross one's mind but he may want another go. At 89 he does not want to leave the next one so far away as he miss it.
   The really curious aspect is with his followers who are obviously free to believe what they want and were no doubt grateful to say goodbye and prepare for their ascent but why do they think it necessary to give away all their money and possessions. Do they imagine a last act of charity will help determine whether they are on God's naughty or nice list? Granted if the world is coming to an end they will have no need of it but then neither will anybody else. Why not play it safe and carry on with your life as normal? God (the genocidal maniac one) has made up his mind and nothing you do now will change that and if this time proves to be yet another damp squib with nothing to show but a belching volcano in Iceland then you still have your job and life savings.
   Such people tend to be stubborn bastards and even the non ending of the World will convince them that they may have got it wrong. The poor calculation excuse was used last time (again if your preacher has shoddy maths would you give everything away on his word). They remain convinced that The Rapture is coming and everything they disapprove of will be swept from the Earth in a perverse delight reminiscent of a child's revenge fantasies.
   Still if their ilk are going to be throwing their weight around in Heaven then I will happily stew in my own juices down in the pits of Hell with all the other atheists.

One year into the Coalition and pressure is building on more ministers in what can only be described as hapless. Straight away David Laws had to stand down over his expenses and Vince Cable had the decision on referring the Murdoch takeover of BSkyB taken away from him after he expressed bias against him along with other details when secretly recorded by a journalist. That the matter was given to Jeremy Hunt who was openly biased in favour of Murdoch obviously doesn't matter. The fiasco in releasing an error strewn list of school building schemes to be cancelled did not exactly get Michael Gove off to a flying start and as for Andrew Lansley's NHS reforms; even the Government have taken a break to let things calm down. Add in Liam Fox challenging Cameron on overseas aid and Chris Huhne allegedly getting someone else to collect his speeding points then what is needed is a moment's calm - perhaps one of the few senior cabinet members who have had previous ministerial experience to step up to the plate. Somebody with the calm, assured statesmanlike presence who can convince the public that somebody in power actually knows what they are doing.
   It is unfortunate therefore that Ken Clarke should get himself embroiled in a debate over rape.  Whether he truly believes that some rapes are worse than others as has been interpreted from his comments or he got himself confused the whole incident does not reflect well. As he himself stated people will try to spin what he said to their advantage to make him look worse but he has been in politics long enough to know that and should therefore judge his comments accordingly. This often makes for bland, anodyne statements from ministers frightened from straying too far from the party line but on an issue as emotive as rape it is probably best to measure what you say. Claiming that rape was being singled out when his policy of halving sentences for guilty pleas was for all crimes was because it added sexual excitement to the headlines is offensive at best especially as it was added during the phone in he was taking part in from a caller.
   I am always wary of immediate resignation calls as they smack of opportunism, whatever the merits, but these things tend to have a momentum of their own and will largely depend on public opinion and how much the media can continue to stoke the issue. The right wing press have never been overly keen on Clarke as he is on the left of the Conservative Party and the left of centre tabloids (basically The Mirror) will use any stick to bash the Coalition with so he may get a hard time and his survival may depend on how long the furore lasts.
   Incidentally as spinning goes they missed a trick with this policy by announcing that a guilty plea would halve your sentence as the public consciousness immediately thinks "Soft on Crime" even though such a policy already exists but with a discount of a third. If, however, they announced that if you are found guilty after pleading not guilty then your sentence will be doubled but with the tariffs set accordingly so that the sentence would be the same then the public mood may be different.

Well that's my civic duty done although I was a little perturbed to be asked if I wanted to vote for both the local elections and the AV referendum. Are people bothering to go out and vote and half arsedly only bothering to vote for one or the other. After all while you're there you might as well scrawl your X on two pieces of paper - how hard can it be. In the end the decision was straight forward: Yes to AV was a no brainer and the council elections were rather straight forward - 3 candidates from 10 with 3 from the main political parties and 1 Independent who I knew little of save for a badly printed and misspelled flyer that came through the letterbox. Now that Labour are in opposition the guilt one feels at voting for them or rejecting them because of differences of opinion / poor performance are gone so I happily selected all three Labour candidates wiping out any memory of choosing the LibDems at the last 2 General Elections.
   That is the problem of many arguments for and against changes to the voting system but it exists under the current system also and that is no matter how you vote you can not guarantee a proper selection of candidates to choose from. The last two elections saw me vote LibDem as I became disillusioned with Labour and there was no viable left wing alternative on the ballot paper. We once had a Respect candidate in what may have been a European election and there may have been someone from the SWP but that has been the sum total since 1997. Plenty from UKIP, Veritas and the BNP but no Greens or even Monster Raving Loonies and seldom few independents at least those who have more of a profile than a blurred photo and whose policies are little more than being unhappy with the current system.
   I would like to think that a win for the Yes camp would encourage smaller parties to take part but that may be wishful thinking, besides looking at the polls it would seem the public don't like change.

Well it hardly seemed worthwhile blogging anything on such a quiet bank holiday but after trawling through the various news websites I did stumble across this little reported story. When I got in to my car this morning the death of Osama bin Laden was still breaking news but by the end of my shift it had already been analysed that much that not only had he been buried at sea but the whole episode felt like old news already.
    The various factions had formed as to whether this made the world a safer place or not, whether he was really dead and incredulity that he wasn't slumming it in a cave. All agree that this will not affect the day to day running of Al Qaeda as he was more a figurehead but that his killing is still a highly symbolic message. Conspiracy theories are bound to crop up and no amount of evidence will persuade those convinced of a cover up. A lot of fingers have been pointed at the Pakistani authorities for not knowing bin Laden was on their doorstep and whilst it is embarrassing it is no proof of conclusion. He has undoubtedly had help from certain people but in his position he would not have risked too many from knowing his whereabouts let alone an entire Government or security agency. As for the mansion so close to the military headquarters there may be something in the "last place you'd think too look" adage and it may be safe to assume that the house was not in his name and he was not in the habit of walking around the town.
   The fact that it is just over 30 miles from Islamabad is irrelevant as even after 10 years I don't think they had got so desperate as to start with house to house searches working their way out from the capital. If they had it may have taken a little longer to check on all the million plus residents in Islamabad.
   Many have been quick to criticise when certain groups in the Arab world celebrate and fire guns in the air when a US airplane is shot down and American commentators are appalled to see the American flag being burnt. This mornings scenes outside the Whitehouse looked very familiar and no doubt those same commentators will be joining in the glee this time.