Here is hope...

Another day another Croydon Council missed bin collection

I have given up trying to get the Council to empty my bins and am now storing rubbish in the garage.  This will solve the problem till 2025.  I offered to meet the Council half way and bring my rubbish round their offices which are half way between me and the dump but no answer as yet...

Is Zionism Racist or is it Racist to say Zionism is Racist? I would ask the United Nations but...

This month I have been wondering some more about Tracy Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley (what you get when you make Carol Vorderman redundant) suing everyone.  I have now found what they are suing over but I can’t link to it because that could be repeating a libel.  So I pootled over to Ms Riley’s twitter feel to find out what she thought in general and found a soundcloud speech by Dr Dave Rich of the CST pinned to it.

Dr Rich starts off with a few of the worst cases of anti-semitism and then goes onto the deductive leap that the Labour party is “institutionally anti-semitic”and full of people who are unable to relate to “Jews and anti-semitism and Israel as they actually are..” which kind of compounds Judeism with Israel.  Ignoring the fact that there are Jews (Neturei Karta and the Satmar Hasidim) who do not see Israel as “the promised land” and, of course, who reject the Jewish religion almost entirely (okay that’s just Alexei Sayle).   Still, it has to be said that Zionism is a relatively modern political obsession dating from the 19^th century when Theodor Herzl invented it ...  

following the Dreyfus affair... 

That said the idea of returning to the (or a) “promised land” has always existed since the seige of Jerusalem in 70AD but it didn’t peak in popularity since the early 20^th Century.  

Of course there was the Holocaust which may have explained why interest in Zionism picked up a bit in the 1940s.... But I digress … Dr Rich then goes on a personal attack against Jeremy Corbyn.  Inviting Hezbollah and Hamas to parliament and calling them his friends…

 

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=10153074175846939

…, supporting campaigns to re-name Holocaust Memorial Day as Genesis Memorial day, supporting a talk entitled “never again from Auschwitz to Gaza” , the anti-semitic mural, the wreath at the Munich Olympic massacre, appearing on Press TV, being mates with a Hamas terrorist etc… saying Zionists have no sense of English irony.  He then goes on to say that there’s a tradition of anti-semitism on the left – although he does qualify this that it isn’t a universal tradition.  He states that Corbyn exhibits a pattern of anti-semitic behaviour and that one doesn’t observe him making similar gaffes in other areas – clearly this man is too young to remember the GLC’s embarrassing dalliances with the IRA…

...which is funny because the Tories spent enough money at the last election reminding everyone about this... but let's not go over all that again... suffice to say branding Corbyn an IRA sympathiser didn't seem to stop him at the ballot box...

One of the problems I find about discussing anti-semitism is the whole Judeism being a religion / Jews being a race thing.  Unique in religions (as far as I know) Judeism claims that that the Jews are God’s chosen people.  This is laid out many times in the Torah – most notably in Deuteronomy 14:2.  However, what exactly the Jews are chosen by God for remains somewhat unclear.   

Indeed when God says to Amos (3:2) “You only have I singled out of all the families of the earth: therefore will I visit upon you all your iniquities,” it doesn’t seem as though there are many advantages to being Jewish.   All the same it seems to me that the idea is that … Jews are supposed to inter-marry Jews.  Of course non-Jews can convert to Judeism … but Jewishness is (according to Orthodox teachings) passed down through the mother.   And for anyone who has the time to convert to Judeism who's male well, ... there’s also the quite testing problem for male adults wanting to become Jewish of having to have one's foreskin removed.  

Circumcision is painful for both babies and adults but babies at least won’t remember it.  There are not for some reason a lot of adult males who are very keen on having their foreskin lopped off…
but anyway ... The point I’m driving at, I think, is that the Jewish religion makes the DNA of the Jewish people a central issue.  If you think this isn’t a big deal maybe it isn’t but … when Benjamin Netanyahu's son dated a lady who was not Jewish The PM’s brother-in-law said he was spitting on his grandparent’s graves. 

 “From my point of view, if he does such a thing, I personally won't allow him to get near their graves… This is the most awful thing that is threatening and was a threat throughout the history of the Jewish people. More awful than leaving Israel is marriage with a gentile. If this happens, God forbid, I'll bury myself I don't know where. I'll walk in the streets and tear off my hair - and here this is happening.”

Of course it could be argued that having all Jewish people in one place actually removes the impetus of the disapora to stay relatively genetically exclusive and that ultimately everyone in Israel and Palestine will inter-marry and the whole thing will be destroyed by sex… but this argument is probably anti-semitic.   Still there’s no polite way of saying that the perpetuation of Jewish DNA is a primary purpose of Judeism – it then follows that it is very difficult to discuss Judeism without making comments about Jewish racial identity. This is because it’s in scripture.  Then again would they have lasted over 1800 years in a sparsely spread out diaspora without these restrictions…? By the way ... if you’re wondering who is and is not a Jew this is (legally) the province within Israel of the Chief Rabbinate who looks like this...

It should be pointed out however that just because Dr Rich seems to purport that Israel is the Home of all Jews and just because Israel employs a public official to decide who is and who is not a Jew does not mean we can hold Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
At least I think that's what one of the 9 IHRA examples of antisemitism says.  Just thought I'd make that clear.

Dr Dave Rich does quite well in cataloguing all the Labour party’s failures in fighting anti-semitism (going all the way back to a magazine Keir Hardy edited once) but I must admit to some confusion when we get onto United Nations Resolution 3379. 

In the early days of Israel the country had a completely open immigration policy for diaspora Jews and this resulted in a bit of a problem which was solved by expansionist policies that would seem to be somewhat at odds with Woodrow Wilson’s doctrine of National Self-Determination which was the foundation of the League of Nations after WWI and the UN after WWII…

Defenders of the Zionist project argue that their right to Self Determination (note not “National Self Determination”) allows them to move back onto land they were ejected from some 1800 years ago whereas everyone else thought that the idea was you were supposed to own the land in the present time not just rock up and claim it.  Of course early settlers did buy land but ... not all of it with the result that Israel has been explicitly officially condemned at least 45 times by the UN.  There are more UN resolutions about Israelthan anything else ever.  The reason for most of these condemnations is Israel’s occupation of the “occupied territories” obtained in the “pre-emptive” 6 days war of 1967 (let’s not go back to the 40s and the Nakba or we’ll be here all year).  

I expect this graph is wrong too... Sorry, I'm too lazy to fact check everything...

As if it wasn’t awkward enough occupying someone else’s lands to "protect yourself" Israel has long exacerbated this situation by not just occupying lands but by placing its own settlements in them which is a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention (it's also a violation Eighth Commandment if anyone needs a Jewish argument against it).  The peak of Israel's run-ins with the United Nations was almost certainly Resolution 3379 which broadly concluded that Zionism was essentially racist.  

But to make matters more complicated United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/86 later over-turned this and stated that Zionism is not a form of racism after all.  Everyone was most relived ...and some people were somewhat confused.

Then again what is racism?   The Macpherson Report defined a racist incident as “any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person”.  Patricia Bidol defined racism as "prejudice plus institutional power".  And the dictionary says "Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior" but who reads that anymore...

So is Zionism racist or was it at one time?  

Well, the great peacemaker and diplomat that is George W Bush, said at the time…

“UNGA Resolution 3379, the so-called "Zionism is racism" resolution, mocks this pledge and the principles upon which the United Nations was founded. And I call now for its repeal. Zionism is not a policy; it is the idea that led to the creation of a home for the Jewish people, to the State of Israel. And to equate Zionism with the intolerable sin of racism is to twist history and forget the terrible plight of Jews in World War II and, indeed, throughout history. To equate Zionism with racism is to reject Israel itself, a member of good standing of the United Nations.”

Fair enough I suppose… but you really can't blame people too much for thinking Zionism racist when this was the official policy of UN for well over a decade until it decided it wasn't true any more and conversely condemning Zionism as racist is racist.

But even when people accept Zionism as not racist this seems to be not quite enough…?  For what Dr Rich seems to want is not just acceptance for Israel but for people to accept that the creation of Israel raised no difficult issues and forget that force was used to establish significant chunks of it.  Well, let's just say that would be easier for more people if Israel gave some of its occupied territories back...?  Just an idea... whether it is an anti-semitic idea is something one would have to refer to the UN and then hope they don't decide they've clearly got it wrong and do a U-turn some time later...

When I was a student Leeds University Union used to have a general policy of a complete ban on any discussion of the Israel / Palestine question in order to keep the peace which I think it would be wise to observe here in future for virtually everything is disputed including this map which doesn’t mention that the Golan Hights are technically part of Syria not Israel or Palestine.

Anyway, I can’t tell you much more because I dozed off at this point…but let’s say I’m keeping my options open in case the UN changes its mind again… Mind you I believe saying Zionism is racist is soon to be made illegal in France so I guess we will all have to agree eventually.

Whenever I see an argument on twitter about anything these days someone always says something like "didn't your mother teach you that if you've got nothing nice to say to say nothing?"  To which the answer is "No, that's why I get good customer service".  However, if there is an arena in which it is wise to say nothing it is the Israel/Palenstine issue... so ... I'll shut up now before this blog goes the way of Alan Rickman and Katharine Viner's play about Rachel Corrie... 

Rubbish Post

Dear Ms Jones & Mr Newman,

Please can someone empty my bins - I cannot contact the Council via the website ...it doesn't work
It doesn't relate to my flat anyway as it's a walk up flat with a different bin collection cycle.
I can't ring the Council they never answer the phone.
I can't possibly take it all down the dump.

If nobody resolves this I may be reduced to taking matters into my own hands
and fly tipping it in the foyer of the Council's offices

Thank you

Anthony Miller

Note: This post is now several years old and remains mysteriously one of the most read on the website.  I have to report that I did not in fact fly tip my rubbish at the Council Offices ...although I'm not sure if this would have been a crime since it is actually theirs?  And the problem resolved.  And my garage is now empty of rubbish.  And the website seems to work now too.  There's still one one answers the phone though ...19/12/21  

The Information Comissioner Writes Incomprehensible Letter

I think what they're saying is that you can ask about existing data you can't ask if data exists...

Dear Mr Miller

I write further to my email of 20 December 2018 regarding this matter.

I have been in touch with Lambeth Council since that email to discuss whether all of your requests are valid requests for information under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR). In other words, whether parts of your email to Lambeth should have been dealt with as normal course of business enquiries rather than as requests for information.

This is because under the EIR applicants are only able to ask for recorded information held by a public authority. Consequently, some enquiries/questions will not generally be valid requests for information under the EIR.

Following my queries, Lambeth agreed to respond to some of your enquiries as part of its normal course of business. I understand Lambeth provided their response to you on 26 February.

The remaining parts of your email in relation to the leaseholders and their properties are valid requests for information under the EIR. However, I remain of the view that Lambeth was entitled to neither confirm nor deny whether it held the requested information on the basis of the exception at regulation 13(5)(A) of the EIR (personal data).

I will arrange for a decision notice to be issued to you upholding the application of regulation 13(5)(A) of the EIR unless you are now happy to withdraw your complaint.

I will assume you would like a decision notice if I have not heard from you by Wednesday 6 March 2019.

Yours Sincerely
Terna Waya
Senior Case Officer

Lambeth Council Answer my FOI request about how it handles leasehold properties

Some time ago (longer than I care remember) I put in an FOI (see here) to Lambeth Council asking them some basic questions about how they handle repairs in Leasehold housing.  The Council said it couldn't answer the questions because it was an invasion of privacy for the other leaseholders.  So I pointed out that not all the questions I asked were person or property specific.

I also made the point that if the Council can't answer questions about its properties because people live in them then that means it can't answer any housing questions whatsoever as almost all Council properties have someone living in them.

The case then escalated to the Information Commissioner's Office who then reverted back to the Council's original line of argument that it couldn't answer any questions at all because people lived in the property and I repeated my argument that not all the questions were property or person specific.  After I had told them that the problem wouldn't go away simply by them repeating the same information back to me over and over as if I had learning difficulties...

The ICO then argued that the release of information under FOI constituted publication to "the whole world" to which I responded that I did not necessarily intend to publish it and even if I did I doubt that anybody would be interested.  I also made the point that just because you publish something on the world wide web does not mean anyone will read it.  First they would have to google it and secondly the website in question would have to have a large enough search engine ranking to show up.  I believe this website sometimes gets as many as 30 hits an article - who can cope with that much public exposure?

I further made the point that once the Council releases information under FOI it no longer has responsibility for its dissemination under FOI and this is the whole point of FOI.  By this point I had completely forgotten why I had put in an FOI and my need for the information had now long passed but who cares?  We got there in the end. 

Well, almost there.  4 out of 6 questions answered isn't bad - particularly since the lady who answers them is based in conveniently Winchester - a mere 64 miles from Lambeth.  Apparently the Council doesn't understand the last two questions so can't answer them...?  I haven't the patience to reply...

That said it's interesting at least the answer to the first question.  Perhaps this explains why the Council like to leave scaffolding up for so long even if there is no work being done ... if the leaseholders are paying for it by the day.  Mind you even that question is only partially answered as it doesn't break down the who the costs go to but ... who cares now?

Dear Mr Miller

With regards to your request for information, we are able to provide the following further response:

“Is scaffolding a free Council service? If not how much does it cost the leaseholders and the Council?

No. The cost for scaffolding is calculated according to the length of time advised by the contractors to complete the works to the property / building.

Does the Council have any sanctions for continual lease violations?

We do not  have sanctions as such but will take enforcement action where necessary for any breaches of lease such as non-payment of services charges.

Why does the Council not inform leaseholders before putting up scaffolding?

Our normal practice is to inform all residents in the building.

Why do Council subcontractors not give written notice of visits as they are supposed to under schedule 4 section 2 (with 3 days’ notice)?

The normal practice is to give written notice of all visits.

Is it the Council's policy to sell the Freehold of a duel dwelling property without the consent of both parties?

No. The councils website has information on this  https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/council-tenants-and-homeowners/homeowners/buying-the-freehold-guide

Is it true that the Council is exempt from right to buy laws with regards to the freehold?

We are unclear exactly what is being asked here; please can you clarify this part of the request?

Is it the Council's policy to sell the freehold of such properties?”

We are unclear exactly what is being asked here; please can you clarify this part of the request?

We hope this is helpful; please clarify the last two questions and we will provide a further response

Kind regards

Jane Shields LLB LLM
Policy & Communications Manager
(FOI Co-ordinator)
Corporate Complaints Unit
P.O. Box 734
Winchester
S023 5DG

The art of grassing with Tracy Ann

For some time I have been ignoring Tracy Ann Oberman on Twitter.  A task I have achieved with some success due to a facility known as the block button despite the fact that she's always all over it spewing endless tweets that are like a form of rhetorical urticaria.

For those of you who are unaware of her Ms Oberman is Jewish and talks a lot about the Labour Party and anti-Semitism.  She does acting stuff and writes for the Jewish Chronicle and if one was to believe her tweets it’s pretty much like the Dreyfus Affair in Labour these days…   

                   A Labour party CLP meeting

This may well be true (I cannot say as I left the part a few years ago for pecuniary reasons) but she seldom fully identifies what she’s complaining about in detail so I can’t go into more detail than that but she does go on and on … on this subject.  If you go over to the Spectator there's a compedium of every anti-Semitic incident in Corybn's Labour so I don't want to waste time and internet space repeating it.  Besides anti-Semitism in Labour must be a big porblem because Tracy Ann keeps telling us that it is to a point which I found tedious...  So I pressed the block button.

As I understand the anti-Semitism crisis in the Labour party … Tracy continually calls Labour party members anti-semitic and they call her other names in response and this cycle continues endlessly with neither side being able to compromise.  Perhaps this is because there is no possible compromise.

Anyway, being a coward who doesn’t want to get involved, be labelled anti-semitic etc I walked away mentally and pressed the block button on Tracy some time ago... which I thought was something of a success for me.   

But blow me down… I was only reading the Metro the other day and she’s banging on about only suing all people on twitter who disagree with …sorry libel her.  The alternative options of blocking them or shutting her own cake hole being seemingly no use in this situation but ...  well… I’m not saying she’s got nothing to complain about but isn’t it a bit obsessive screenshotting every single less than flattering tweet…?

…she also seems very sure that everyone who hates her is part of an organised conspiracy run out of Labour Party HQ …which seems unlikely simply because I don’t think the Labour party under Corbyn is that organised… (I get this impression from the fact it has just split).  Also if we're going to reference Westerns I would question her strategy based on the number of times the "man with no name" wins...

As I say I try very hard to be ignorant of all this but never-the-less out of sheer self-publicity-persistence she has broken through my carefully constructed wall of ignorance about her via the Metro.  Oh dear… 

Call me old fashioned by there just seems something nasty about threatening everyone who disagrees with you or even is rude to you in this way.   

I suppose I’m allowed to say this as I have only 371 followers … but … 

I think it was Arthur Daley who said "Nobody likes a grass, Tracy......" besides which the penchant of her solictor for going round threatening all and sundry with litigation and demanding addresses does not seem to me entirely in line with the pre-libel protocol for litigation (see here).  Should he not be identifying first the exact words complained of and the redress requested (for example removal and/or compensation) in the first instance in order to attempt to settle the matter out of court?  Instead he seems to claim that he needs to go to "great expense" to recover the accused's addresses when there is no pecuniary need for this (as far as I can see) at this particular juncture.  Besides which going after 70 people at once seem to me as at best something of an expensive scattergun approach to justice or at worst ...?

The Chamberlain of London politely refunds me but admits no wrongdoing

I successfully appealed my PCN from the City of London on the grounds that the letter they send out is mathematically misleading.

The letter threatens to increase the £65 charge by 100 per cent if not paid within 14 days but neglects to explain that if the driver mounts a challenge then the 14 grace period restarts from the point at which the City of London recieves the letter as explained on the authority's website.  

Not content with doubling the charge the letter then threatens to tripple it if not paid within 28 days which it describes as a "50 per cent increase" when I actually make it a 200 per cent increase.  This achievement in sophistry is achieved by arguing that the charge is actually £130 and will be discounted by 50 per cent if paid within 14 days and increased by 50 percent if not paid within 28 days.  Whereas in all practical terms the charge is £65 - trippled if you don't pay within 28 days.   

I also argued that the letter is wrong under the terms of Wednesbury unreasonableness because it claims that a charge can never be reversed once paid which denies the agency of the City of London in cashing the payment and argued that since I had sent them a physical cheque which is a push-pull transaction then they must have exercised invidiual agency during the act of cashing it and that it is not legal for an authority to deny responisbility in this way.

The Chamberlain of London says he is very sorry but he has no control over the wording of his letters - they are entirely dictated to him by Act of Parliament...

City of London PO Box 270, London EC2P 2EJ
Switchboard 020 7606 3030
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk
DX 121781

Penalty Charge Notice (PCN): CL55350099
Vehicle Registration: GK13BZF
Department of the Built Environment
Carolyn Dwyer BEng (Hons), DMS, CMILT, FCIHT
Director of the Built Environment
Telephone 020 7332 3366
Minicom 020 7332 3545
Fax 020 7332 3776
Email pto@cityoflondon.gov.uk

Our ref CL55350099
Case Officer
S McGregor

Dear Mr Miller

Thank you for your communication in relation to the above PCN. Your email has been
passed to me to respond as the relevant manager. I apologise for my delay in replying.
I appreciate your frustration with the PCN letter sent to you. The wording on that letter is
prescribed by law so we are limited on the information we can put on the letter. The reason
the discount rate exists is to encourage motorists to pay without challenge and to reduce
administration on both sides. In practice most, but not all, local authorities will keep the case
at the discounted rate whilst dealing with any challenge from the PCN recipient. This is the
most practical approach we can take within the legislation and it is not deception.
In relation to conditional payment, unfortunately this is also not permitted by the regulations.

The payment address is in Sheffield and the appeal address is in the City of London. Payment
is an acceptance of liability so our contractor in Sheffield will simply present the cheque
which is why we have a clear notice on the PCN which says to not pay if you wish to
challenge the notice. It would take Parliament to change the legislation for our notices to be
clearer.

I have however reviewed your case and cancelled it under the terms below. The refund
should already be with you. Please let me know if it is not.

The PCN was issued to the above vehicle for failing to comply with a prohibition on certain
types of vehicle (motor vehicles) - only buses and pedal cycles allowed Monday to Friday
between 7am and 7pm. This is because the above vehicle has been seen to have passed
through a sign prohibiting certain class of vehicle from accessing Bank Junction during the
restricted time(s).

Since Monday 22 May 2017, the ‘Bank on Safety’ experimental traffic scheme, aimed at
reducing collisions and improving road safety, became operational meaning that only buses
and pedal cycles are able to cross Bank Junction, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 7am to 7pm. Other vehicles will be rerouted via advanced warning signs on the
approaches to the area and the junction.

The Court of Common Council approved a report on 13 September 2018 that
recommended making the experimental scheme permanent and as of 25 September 2018
the scheme came permanently into operation.

The Bank Junction comprises the approaches of Princes Street, Threadneedle Street, Cornhill,
Poultry, Lombard Street, King William Street and Queen Victoria Street.
Blue bus and cycle only signs are displayed at the entry points of the restriction. Advanced
directional signs are also in place to give advance warning to the restriction to further assist
with alternative routes.

A further selection of maps and information regarding the restriction including loading areas,
vehicle length and access routes to each of the approach arms can be found at
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/bankonsafety.

Having given consideration to your case, I have taken the decision to cancel the PCN as a
gesture of goodwill and a warning of the restrictions in place.

I would add that this should not be viewed as a precedent for any future cases as we look
at each and every case individually upon its merits.

Furthermore, the City expects all drivers to comply with any restrictions that are in place and
should you receive a PCN in similar circumstances it may be enforced.

Minority Report

Tell me if Im wrong...

Theresa May had 318 MPs
The Unionists had 10 MPs
So the government when elected had 328 MPs
You need 326 to form a government (650/2 + 1).

So if 3 Tories have resigned Theresa May and the Unionists only have 325 MPs
You need 326 to form a government (650/2 + 1). 
So they are running a minority government
without a supply and confidence deal in place.

Isnt that unconstitutional ?

Tell me if I'm wrong?

Shouldn't we have a general election or something?

ISIS calling, ISIS calling ...

There’s only one thing worse than Brexit on TV at the moment and that’s Shamima Begum.  ISIS having been defeated Shamima now wants to come back home so her daughter can get NHS treatment.  Her previous two offspring having died of being born into a war zone Shamima now wants our sympathy.  A one woman hot button issue she pervades my TV night and day with her untidy mouth and grating accent... 

For journalists seem to love filming her – in the same way that rubberneckers like looking at car crashes.  Please give it a rest!  The woman is just so tedious.  Blessed with all the charm of a bag of drawing pins she says things like “it wasn’t her intention to be a poster girl” as if anyone would put her on a poster.  Most of her other comments aren’t even cogent enough to relate or analyse yet they are poured into my home as if they mean something. 

Watching journalists feed her self-incriminating leading questions is like watching a child lift up a stone to see if there are any creepy crawlies underneath to play with.  Not that she needs much prompting to show her support for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant has not diminished.  But she tries to look and sound not a fanatic … and fails over and over…

Then again she clearly struggles to put her thoughts into anything vaguely resembling coherent (let alone cogent) sentences and comes out with muddled thinking that we’re all supposed to analyse seriously. 

The bleeding heart lefties say that she was groomed and can’t be held accountable for her actions (despite the age of criminal responsibility being 12 last time I looked) and the right have nothing but scorn and vitriol.  “All twelve year olds are stupid politically,” say people who have grown up to be stupid politically. Maybe I was a bit of a stick in the mud or maybe it was just a lack of opportunity but I don’t remember committing treason when I was 12.  The right can’t wait to cast the first stone…

But really I think her problem is that she was just a bit thick.  She seems to think Syria under ISIS was just like “anywhere else” but with a “few bombs”.  The fact that she has 2 dead children by the age of 20 is not something she can connect with ISIS its self…  Save us.  You can see why she was so easily recruited to ISIS whenever she talks … there’s little between the ears.  Well, there doesn’t seem to be much… either that or she hides her intelligence well or… who cares… leave her there - it's Darwinism at work...

Why did these girls join ISIS?  Well, let’s just say we can see the appeal of a cult that says women should not be educated to women who don’t want to be… Honestly it makes you appreciate William Joyce ...

Berger's 7

So farewell then Mike Sour Grapes...  I will miss Mike Grapes.  It’s always nice for a party to have people who really don’t fit in and Mr Grapes has been constantly critical of successive party leaderships for as long as I can remember – he is almost the Greek Chorus of the Labour party.  He, with the other veteran backbenchers in the gang of 7, has jumped before they are deselected by their constituency parties. 

Yes, they are now going to be Independent.  I can just see them saying they are going to “do politics differently” like Andrew Pelling – who proved that if you spend £20,000 you may just make back your deposit.  Or perhaps they will be as successful as the SDP which (according to Wikipedia) had (for the year ending 2008) 41 members.  In 2017, the party had a total income of £2,094.83, no principal authority councillors and two town councillors.  Today it has Patrick O'Flynn MEP who defected from UKIP.  Come back David Owen – all is forgiven.  Well, almost all … I loved the SDP / Liberal Alliance – a party with not one leader but two (both called David) …who could ask for more? 

It all goes to show the problem with Jeremy Corbyn’s plan to return power to the “grassroots” of the party… Once elected MPs can do what they like.  Therefore however many elections Labour party members have the power always really remains with the parliamentary party and ultimately parliament.  For while we can now recall MPs for a custodial prison sentence of a year or less, suspension from the House ordered by the Committee on Standards or a conviction for providing false or misleading expenses claims being a turncoat is unfortunately not a criminal offence.

Jackpot247.com and the Closed University

Today I am very tired.  Yesterday I was very tired so went to bed early only to wake up early in the morning.  So I switched my TV on to discover that ITV from 40 minutes past midnight to 3am is now one long giant casino.  Fixed odds betting terminals may have been banned from the high street but shift workers like me are secure in the opportunity that they can now always lose their money suddenly after a very long shift.  It’s a mystery to me – a man who grew up in an era when Sid James used to have to slip out the house surreptitiously to the betting shop to carry on his accumulators behind his wife’s back – how the gaming industry get away with being so out in the open.  As beer and fags become ever more taboo it’s more and more incongruous how shameless and invasive gambling and gambling advertising has become… it seems to get in everywhere … I may have excluded rats and mice from my kitchen finally but I’m sure I shall go in one day to find that someone has set up a casino in the fridge.

Moreover I also seem to remember when adverts and TV programs had to be separated by an iron curtain … adverts and product placements were not allowed in content and visa versa.  These rules have been relaxed for a while but Jackpot247.com takes it to a whole other level.  The program is the product (gambling) while also the advertisement (for gambling). It's like QVC if the presenters had had their personalities surgically removed.

Indeed so successful is the financial orobous that is Jackpot247.com  that I’ve been watching for over an hour now and have seen no advert for any other service or product whatsoever.  None is needed because this is a 2 hour 20 minutes advert for gambling.  And it’s so dull - there's no variety because there is ultimately only one product... at least with QVC you can laugh at some of the tat they sell.  Two young ladies in sparkly dresses stand in front of screens and wheels and invite viewers at home to phone in their money.  People do.  It’s as thrilling as a Blue Peter charity appeal “Totaliser”.

I have many vices.  I even enjoy beer, cigars and even the odd flutter or scratchcard but how people get hooked on gambling is beyond me.  Yet they do – it ruins lives.  If you wonder why here’s a story ... 

Once upon a time I was interviewed for a job by a gambling company who were interested in me since I know about arcane rapid development languages such as TCL TK.  Now, I have a degree in physics but even I found it difficult to understand some of the higher level mathematics employed to separate the punters from their hard earned and grappling with it was enough to put one off gambling for life… Not since I got turned down for a job with a missile manufacturer have I felt so intellectually out of my depth (I don’t know why they rejected me – I mean it’s not rocket science, is it?) … Because the people who run gambling are incredibly smart which makes the odds of beating them...?

Years ago I used to go to the Tottenham Court Road Casino because it was one of the few places in Westminster one could get a drink after hours.  However, even the prospect of subsidised booze could not induce me to stay long in the rooms of people with dead eyes pulling one arm bandits or staring blankly at tables while bouncers hover in the corners. Gambling is like the ring in Lord of the Rings - when the novelty of going invisible subsides people find that they are unfortunately permanently invisible to society.  Even lottery winners become invisible ...as they cower away from the prying jealousy that results from unearned wealth.  Jackpot247.com has one thing up on real physical casinos and that’s that there are no dead eyes and lost souls to see – those are out there beyond the studio.  Safely going bankrupt in privacy…

Okay everyone’s got to earn a living …even turf accountants … but come on … is there no better use for a premium digital freeview channel at night than this?  I mean I wasn’t expecting the return of the Open University (after all that’s now pay for content) but Jackpot247.com ?  Is that really where we are as a society? In fact if you think about it this is the reverse of the Open University.  Once late night TV used to be about intellectual elevation and obtaining qualifications - now it is about people with MSCs and PHDs in STEM separating the plebs from their disposable income.

Also please take down the balloon hearts – Valentine’s day was yesterday…

My continued patience...

Good Afternoon Anthony, 
I hope you are well. 
I am sorry for the continued delay with your exchange. 
I have chased the suppliers again and escalated this with them to arrange the exchange. I will be in touch with another 48 hours. 
Thank you for yoru continued patience

This week remaindered in Poundland I found the late Brandon Lee

This week I am on holiday so have been continuing my exploration of cinema classics remaindered in Poundland by watching an old copy of “the Crow”.  Well, this DVD was so old it had an aspect ratio of 4:3 whereas I belive the original film was 1.85:1 so please bare in mind that despite watching the film from one end to the other I didn’t see the whole film – only about 60 per cent of it.   

However, I couldn’t help but notice the similarity between the makeup and general performance of Brandon Lee as the Crow and that of Heath Ledger as the Joker in that Batman film some years later.  I wondered if I was the only person who had pondered this and so googled it to find bitter arguments all over the internet disclaiming that there is any influence beyond the purely coincidental. 

The Crow is an avenger whereas the Joker is a psychopath someone says.  True, but there is none the less a similarity in the performance which may be a comic book thing or may be something more.  For a start, yes,  there’s the make-up...  But there’s also the fact they both appear to be sadists.  While the Joker is clearly a villain and the Crow a more morally ambiguous character they both come up with some clearly over-elaborate methods of killing people and signposting that they are going to do so to the audience and breaking – or nearly breaking - the 4^th wall as they do so...  Add to that the permanently dark comic book world and it would seem odd to me if the makers of the latter film had not been influenced at all by the earlier.  Then again maybe all this is a comic book thing…

It’s strange watching it all these years later.  It looks dated and yet the model work is meticulously done.  The sweeping camera shots are ahead of their time.  Of course fortunately the Crow was shot out of order because its star was – as I’m sure you all already know – shot 8 days before the wrap of production… yes I know that’s an awful pun but I couldn’t help it … honest.   

Watching it this time round I was more aware of where Lee is absent in the movie.  Somewhere between the final confrontation and end scene in the graveyard there’s a lot of running around where we don’t see Lee’s face and the more times one watches it the more clearly the Brandon shaped holes in the film can be seen.  Maybe one shouldn’t look too closely.

One other thing the film has going for it – perhaps also leading man death related – is its brisk running time of a 100 minutes rather than the 2 or more hours we’re forced to endure of everything else these days.  Please make some more shorter films someone.  And bring back cartoons before the main feature…

That’s all folks!

How do you report the fact that Croydon Council's website doesn't work when the Council only communicates via its website?

Not content with not emptying my bins the Council now insists I must now report them un-emptied within 48 hours or they're not coming out again... sure that'll keep the missed collection reports down...

... the Council's website is the only way to communicate with the Council which is unfortunate as the Council seems to think I have no bins...

...it says this might be that it thinks this because my address is not in the system correctly...

...and is convinced that my address is somewhere called "FOI Street" - Is this a punishment for having put in an FOI request once?

I cannot change my address on the Council's website and since the only way for plebs to communicate with the Council is via its website I appear to be stuffed.