At last Googles street view has uploaded Reading!

I took a picture of them doing it last April, so its nearly a year. I was hoping to see me taking this picture, but I couldn't find it.



However this is me looking out of my window. I have moved house since this was taken.



Google Earth In Security Alert; Faslane, GCHQ and AWE

Google launches Street View despite privacy concerns where I showed the top picture before, and discussed how controversial it was.

It may seem odd, but one use for this is to read the parking restrictions. It isn't easy to find out if you are visiting an area what the local parking rules are, but with this you can zoom in and read the signs before you set off.

Ricky Duveen LD, Naz Sarkar (Lab), Bishop Stephen Cotrell , Adrian Windisch (Green), Alok Sharma (Cons)

Ricky Duveen LD, Naz Sarkar (Lab), and the Bishop.

Bishop, Adrian Windisch (Green)

It was very entertaining, I will write more shortly.

The Bishop of Reading was an excellent Chair, putting us all on the spot. It was much better than the bikering that happened on the weekend. Shame Daisy couldn't be there, I was interested to see her position on the environment. Cllr Duveen was a decent substitute.

Some excellent questions from the audience, tough to answer.

Some highlights; Naz saying the UK were leading the way with Wind Farms (we are
Wind power accounts for approximately 19% of electricity use in Denmark, 9% in Spain and Portugal, and 6% in Germany and the Republic of Ireland. The UK are near the worst with 2%.

A anti wind campaigner asked about wind noise, I said I've stood below the Green Park Turbine and it was quiet, particularly as the M4 nearby is so noisy and close by.

After competing as to who can make the biggest cuts, it seems now the big parties are trying to claim to be the closest to Thatcher. Needless to say the Greens are not joining this contest.


In an attempt to appeal to Tory voters, Mr Clegg said that his party’s economic policies are more representative of Thatcherite free-market principles than those of David Cameron.
Many of Britain’s current economic problems, Mr Clegg said, could be explained by a failure to enact the pro-competition policies put forward by Lady Thatcher.

This reminds me of Gordon Brown getting a picture with Thatcher, attempting to out Tory the Tories.

Clegg also said his party’s tax policies were similar to those of Lord Lawson, the Conservative chancellor during the 1980s. The Lib Dem plan to raise the starting threshold for income tax to £10,000 is a “Lawson policy”.

Mr Clegg’s praise for Conservative figures may fuel speculation that he would be prepared to co-operate with the Tories in the event of a hung parliament after the election. In an interview with the Spectator magazine, Mr Clegg said that he had campaigned against many of Lady Thatcher’s policies during the 1980s. But, he said, he now realised that she had been right about many things.

‘I’m 43 now. I was at university at the height of the Thatcher revolution and I recognise now something I did not at the time: that her victory over a vested interest, the trade unions, was immensely significant. I don’t want to be churlish: that was an immensely important visceral battle for how Britain is governed. “And what has now happened to the British economy? It has gone belly-up because, once again, we have allowed a vested interest to run riot.’ That “vested interest” is the banking sector, Mr Clegg said.

Mr Clegg said that Mr Cameron, the Tory leader, and George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, were unwilling to tackle the “vested interest” of the bankers. “A real liberal believes in genuine competition, a genuine level playing field and he is unremittingly hostile to vested interests.”
The Lib Dems are facing a strong challenge from the Conservatives at the general election. Tory strategists believe they can capture more than ten parliamentary seats currently held by Lib Dem MPs, most of them in the south and south-west of England.

Nick Clegg is trying to walk a middle line that attracts support from floating voters on both left and right, but this is a dangerous way to do it.


Not to be outdone UKIP want to privatise everything

Telegraph
Guardian

Figures produced by the Government paint a striking picture of the way in which the country has changed since 1997. They reveal a sharp decline in many of the traditional businesses and services which once sustained community life.



The number of Hospitals and Clinics has fallen by 580,
2,380 schools have closed,
196 libraries,
7500 Post Offices,
1,310 Public lavatories,
3,460 pubs have closed
and 150 less swimming pools.
The number of police stations has fallen by 160,

However we have:
276 more lapdancing clubs,
1,270 more bookies,
1,060 more supermarkets.

Oscars 2010 heroine Kathryn Bigelow couldn't have timed her historic first-female-director win better, because today the world is celebrating International Women's Day 2010.

The 100th anniversary of International Women's Day, marked with the slogan 'Equal Rights, Equal Opportunities: Progress for All', will see rallies, seminars and assemblies take place around the globe.

So, what makes 8th March so significant? First proposed in 1910 and launched in 1911, International Women's Day came about because of a woman named Clara Zetkin (leader of the 'Women's Office' for Germany's Social Democratic Party), who thought every country should mark an annual Women's Day to press for her gender's demands.

The Independent has listed 100 women who changed the world; it includes Caroline Lucas; Politician. 'As leader of the Green Party, who could become Britain's first Green MP in this year's general election, Lucas has given the party a mainstream image in the "Others" backwater of British politics. Formerly active in CND and Oxfam, she is also the vice-president of the RSPCA and the Stop the War Coalition.'


The list contains some great people, but didn't include Blue Peter presenter Helen Skelton, who has completed a 2,000-mile kayak trip along the Amazon for Sport Relief. She has gone 2,010 miles since she set off on her solo journey from Natua in Peru on 20 January. The BBC star, who had never been in a kayak before training, broke two world records as she became the first woman to paddle the length of the river. In April 2009, Skelton became only the second woman ever to finish the 78 miles Namibia Ultra Marathon. The TV presenter paddled about 60 miles a day, six days a week, to reach the target. "It's been tough but I've had enough highs to make it more than worthwhile. Sport Relief will take place from 19 to 21 March and will raise money for charity schemes in the UK as well as developing countries.

Progress report; what remains to be done.
POVERTY 70 per cent of the world's poorest people are women.
HEALTH Three million girls a year are at risk of genital mutilation every year
SLAVERY At least 300 women are discovered in domestic slavery every year in the UK
SEXUAL VIOLENCE The conviction rate for rape in Scotland is 3.7 per cent
CHILDBIRTH 1,500 women die unnecessarily every day giving birth or during pregnancy

How interesting to see my rival PPCs for Reading West on the Politics Show. Though I am the Green Party candidate, the first I knew of it was watching Alok Sharma, Naz Sarkar and Daisy Benson on TV on a Sunday at lunchtime. Still its their loss, the three of them were so similar it was short on debate, though we had plenty of bickering.

The introduction was done at Risc, great to see the roof garden on TV. Then they showed footage of Gordon Browns 'secret' visit. Well it seems to have been secret from Naz and Anneliese who didn't mention it at the time on their sites. Mind you they don't mention each other either!

First there was a little quiz on Readings history.
Where is a King of England buried? I knew that, as did Alok. Henry 1 at Reading Abbey.
What is the population of Reading. All 3 knew it to be around 200,000.

Question 1. Health. Alok discussed his background and conversations with people about the NHS, its getting worse despite the extra investment. Naz launched into an attack on the Tories, defended targets, cancer guarantees. Daisy discussed cutting bureaucracy, targets led to Staffordshire problems, infant mortality here same as Hackney. More power to elected health boards, sounds like increased bureaucracy to me. Millions lost on IT but a bit late to change it.

I would have discussed the privatisation of the NHS, with corporations making millions and us paying more for longer, a burden for future generations.


Q2. Education. Naz wanted brand new classrooms for everyone! No one picked him up on this, would it need to be every year, or perhaps every term, perpetual building. Alok discussed academies, schools and teachers having more say. Daisy discussed the postcode lottery.

I would have said we need every school to be a good school, letting rich people set schools agendas means some children will learn creationism ahead of evolution! Education has become a competitive as watching football league tables with exams every year, but there is no level playing field.

Q3. Housing. LD lobbying has helped Lab says Daisy, build more family homes not executive flats. Alok supports regeneration, opposed Pincents Hill and Bath Rd reservoir. Naz claimed Alok had jumped on Martin Salters campaign, though Alok had actually already said that Naz and Daisy were with him on this. Daisy said this bickering turned people off, then did some bickering. Naz said Dee park was a Labour investment, and I thought it was our money!

I have some radical ideas on this, all those empty office blocks could be turned into housing with no need to build on green fields, as Labour decided in the Barker review. A bit of government planning would see investment in areas where housing is cheap and jobs scarce, so less pressure on the South East. When I discussed this with Martin Salter he though I was being Stalinist. We moved the DVLA to Swansea years ago, why not send some other London based civil servants to the rest of the country? I see Labour have been considering my plan. 'Labour's plan to dismantle Whitehall revealed; 132,000 civil servants and 90,000 employees of "arm's-length bodies" currently based in London and the south-east'.



I just had a look at the Bershire Blog listings for the last month, this blog was at number 16, Naz at number 42, no sign of Daisys blog and Alok doesn't blog. Even my greenconstruction blog got to number 47, that only gets updated a couple of times a month. So I declare myself the blog champion Reading West PPC.

Theres a campaign to save the Tilehurst allotments from the builders. Website www.saveouropenspace.co.uk/

The land belongs to the the Tilehurst Poor’s Lands Charity. www.tilehurstallotments.co.uk/

Tilehurst Poor’s Land Charity dates from the early nineteenth-century, when the open fields, common meadows and common waste of Tilehurst were enclosed into private ownership under an Act of 1811. The fields were divided into strips, and each farmer had a number of strips in fields. The same crop was grown in each field in any particular year, and after the corn had been harvested, the livestock of all these farmers was grazed on the stubble to provide manure. The common meadows were by the Thames and the Holybrook. They too were grazed for part of the year in common, but grass for hay was held in strips, like the fields. The common waste was available for grazing and the gathering and cutting of fuel. These rights belonged to the owners and occupiers of certain properties, and most of the poor had no established rights on the common waste. However, rights to gather fuel had been allowed by custom. For some years, and this was seen as a way of reducing the rate for poor relief at no great cost.

When the common lands were enclosed,1/16 by value of the waste was allotted for the poor. This was at Kentwood Hill, Armour Hill and Polsted rd., including the allotment gardens and what is now the Victoria recreation Ground. This land still belongs to the Charity set up to manage it. There were further allotments of land at halls Rd and Chapel Hill. The land at Halls Rd and Chapel Hill were sold for residential development, and this provided the capital from which most of the Charity’s income comes. There are still six allotment gardens at Chapel Hill and some 80 on the other site.

Originally, the land was to be let and the rent used to buy fuel for the poor. This continued for many years, but gradually, with the decline of furze, wood and coal as fuel, grants were made to the poor for other purposes. The last coal tickets were issued in 1972. The area of benefit was originally the Ancient Parish of Tilehurst, which included Theale, Calcot and Holybrook. More recently, this area has been extended to include the Borough of Reading, as some of the Ancient Parish is now in the Borough. In practice, the area of benefit is to the west of the Reading West railway line.


The Charity has owned and let allotment gardens for over 80 years, as part of its letting of the land it owns. The allotments are seen as an investment, and there is no statutory duty on the Charity to provide them. The net annual income is usually around £750 a year, a small part of the Charity’s income.

The landlord owns another small allotment site off Chapel Hill, the Victoria Recreation Ground, the allotment site at Armour Hill/Polsted rd, and land (now uncultivated), called the ‘reserved land’. Most of the reserved land is bounded by Kentwood Hill; the rest is bounded by Armour Hill. This reserved land was let as allotments until 1998 when the tenancies on this land were not renewed. The Charity explained that they hoped to sell this land for housing, and the tenants were offered plots on the main remaining allotment site.

The proposals were controversial, and to date there has not been a successful planning application. There are many groups opposing development on the reserved land, the most prominent being Save Our Open Space/.

Currently Reading Council are reviewing the Local Plan. The new ‘Local Development Framework’ will contain details about the use of all land in the Borough. Some consultation about the future of the ‘reserved land’ has already occurred and more is anticipated. You can find out more by looking on the Reading Council web site page 83. Copied below.

Site Address Land at Kentwood Hill and Armour Hill, Tilehurst
Customer/ RBC Reference/s SS28, 29, 52, 92
Size in ha 1.95

Current Use Former allotments (Tilehurst Poor’s Land Charity – ‘Reserved lands’) and builders yard
Description of Location Allotments and recreation ground immediately adjacent.
Residential surrounding site. Vacant builders yard buildings fronting Kentwood Hill.

Proposal/s 1) SS52 C3 housing for 60-70 units (hatched area); 2) SS28 & 29 (hatched area) and reserved lands to be protected under policy LEI 2 as a Major Areas of Open Space along with the whole area (whole area outlined above)

Constraints/ Issues Proposed development area adjacent to area covered by TPO 24/00 (group and individual trees). Should it be retained for open space and/or future allotment use? Potential contamination to be checked related to historic uses at builder’s yard. Allotments provide habitats for arrange of species. Part lowland mixed deciduous woodland (BAP habitat), potential for protected species. Covered by deeds trust. Proposal should include a desk-based archaeological assessment to clarify the impact of development and previous remains and ground clearance.
Site Reference: SA17

The consultation process on all LDF documents referred to above runs between 19th February and 2nd April 2010. Exhibitions on the consultation will be held at the following venues and times:
9 March 2010 South Reading Youth and Community Centre 9am to 1pm
9 March 2010 Tilehurst Library 2pm to 7pm
10 March 2010 South Reading Youth and Community Centre 2pm to 7pm
12 March 2010 Civic Centre, Committee Room 1, 2pm to 7pm

Responses can be made in writing to:
LDF Planning Team, Planning Department Civic Centre Reading, RG1 7AE
Tel: 0118 939 0286 Fax: 0118 939 0435

Or by E-mail to: ldf@reading.gov.uk

I was delighted to be contacted by the Woodland trust, I have been a supporter of theirs for some years. Earlier today I was contacted by Construction News with a different message.

Being a candidate this time is a little different to 2005, then I got a pile of mail from organisations, far too much to read. This time its by email, so I can see it in a more easily accessible form.

I agree with every point below.

Dear adrian,

Please find enclosed a copy of the Woodland Trust’s manifesto. As a candidate at the next general election I wish to raise with you the importance of doubling native woodland cover over the next 50 years.

Creating new native woods and planting trees is not a luxury but essential if we are to tackle challenges such as climate change mitigation and adaptation, wildlife loss, improving public health – both physical and mental – and shaping places where people want to live, work and spend their leisure time. They also offer genuine value for money at a time of enormous pressure on the public finances. Sadly, however, the levels of woodland creation with broadleaved trees has halved in England in the last six years.

Woods and trees matter to everyone because they are vital in securing our quality of life. The Trust calls on all political parties to take the following actions to help secure the benefits of woods and trees:

1.) Adopt a target of doubling native woodland cover in the UK over the next fifty years, bringing together the public, private and voluntary sectors to make this a reality.

2.) Enable every child to plant trees and engage with the natural world as part of their formal education to develop rounded citizens equipped for 21st century challenges.

3.) Provide planning guidance which makes provision for the creation of new native woods within walking distance of residential areas.

4.) Offer incentives to encourage private landowners to plant trees.

5.) Retain a public forest estate but ensure it reflects society’s changing needs with an enhanced emphasis on woodland creation.

6.) Provide global leadership on deforestation by ensuring the UK’s equivalent to the rainforest – our ancient woods and trees – are protected for their biodiversity and cultural importance.

Please visit the Woodland Trust website at www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/candidates-commitment and commit to working for the expansion of native woodland cover in the next Parliament.

Best wishes,

Lee Bruce
Government Affairs Officer
After following the link above I got this message.

Thank you for supporting the Woodland Trust's aspiration to see more native woods and trees planted in the UK. We look forward to working with you in the next Parliament.

The Cooperative movement gives money to the Labour Party. But the Labour Party support supermarket Giants Tesco, and a few years ago gave them permission to open yet another huge supermarket opposite the Oxford Road Coop. Now the Oxford Rd Co-op to close its doors. When will the coop give up on Labour?

The decision to site the Tesco here was always an odd one, it seemed designed to destroy the vibrant local shops and damage the community. For a century the site was that of Battle Hospital, so thanks to new Labour we lost our local hospital and got a giant supermarket.

Part of the site was a flood plane, so now when it rains we have increased danger of flooding, and pollution as they sited a petrol station there.

It has added to traffic problems in the area, on the already congested Oxford and Portman Roads. Tesco made a promise that cars would only use the Portman Road, but many customers park on the Oxford Road instead.

Many trees were cut down to make way for the car park, even those with tree protection orders. Labour support for Tesco was matched by the LD and Tories who all voted for this plan.

Greg Costello, owner of Workhouse Coffee Shop further down Oxford Road, said: “I can categorically say that Tesco has destroyed shopping in West Reading. “No-one walks down here any more. They all just drive straight to Tesco and it has obliterated the local businesses.”

If you paid a scriptwriter to make up some reasons to abolish the House of Lords, I doubt he would do as good a job as they are managing themselves.

In the headlines now is Baron Ashcroft of Belize. Since 2001 Ashcroft has given £5,160,915 to the Tories. He was given his peerage after promising to become a "permanent" UK resident, rather than a non dom where he did not have to pay UK taxes on overseas earnings. But this was later changed to "long-term resident" - a lesser commitment - after discussions with civil servants. Tory deputy chairman and donor Lord Ashcroft revealed this week that he had been non-domiciled for tax purposes for the past decade.

On a similar theme, Labour have a troika of of non-dom donors, Lords Mittal, Cohen and Paul have given £6,734,250. Mittal bought a bit of corporate lobbying after a donation of £4 million. Tony Blair lobbied for Mittal’s business interests when he was still Prime Minister. Ronnie Cohen, PFI profiteer and non-domiciled donor?

Lord Paul – £69,250 in donations to Labour, including £45,000 to Gordon Brown’s leadership campaign. A close friend of Gordon Brown and appointed to the Privy Council last summer, he has admitted to being ‘non-dom’. Lord Paul put up one fifth of the money for Gordon’s leadership campaign.

Alan Johnson said that Michael Ashcroft is "basically unpatriotic because he has remained a non dom." I'm sure loyal Labour donors Paul, Cohen and Mittal will like that.

I don't even need to mention Baron Mandleson.

Lib Dem Lord Falkland, the 15th viscount, designated a converted oast house in Kent as his main residence so he could collect allowances. Yet neither he nor his wife owns or rents the property. It actually belongs to his wife’s aunt, who also pays the utility and telephone bills. By saying his main residence was outside London, he was able to claim £174 a night for accommodation in the capital. “I am quite prepared to accept the fact that a loophole has been here and a number of us have exploited it, there’s no doubt about that.”

Lib Dem Baroness Jenny Tonge was sacked after spreading lies about Israelis organ trafficking in Haiti. George Monbiot calls her 'a bully in ermine'; and says he has found a 'clinching argument for closing the House of Lords. It is the presence in that chamber of a peer called Lady Tonge of Kew.' She made some unfortunate remarks about Botswana Bushmen, the government want to evict them to exploit the land, she is on the side of the exploiters.

No need to mention Michael Brown.

These are just symptoms of a dodgy corrupt system, we need to think again time for a change.
Perhaps its time for a fully elected chamber. And a mechanism for ejecting the offenders.

I saw an interesting leaflet recently, it predicted the General Election result for Reading East based on the number of Cllrs.

Whats annoying is not just the prediction, but the ridiculous statement 'Only The LD or Cons can win here'. They have some cheek, saying who can win, especially after how close it was in 2005, the Tories only just beat Lab then. Rather than tell people who can win I prefer to leave it to voters, it is there one chance to make the decisions; the politicians have to accept this.



I can see why the LD would like this way of looking at things, it lets them pretend they are front runners with the Tories. But if that technique was used elsewhere that would predict some great results for the Greens in several constituencies, but somehow I doubt the Lib Dems are doing it on those areas, only where it suits them. When they talk about fairness they don't think it applies to them.

If we were all to use the best result for our prediction, then Greens would use the Euro Election, which saw the Greens get 2nd place! For Reading East – Cons 6,051; Green 3,504; Lab 3,057; LD 3,040; UKIP 2,169. (These numbers are from the RBC part of the constituency, which is most of it.) Now I don't think thats a fair prediction, people don't vote in Euro elections as they do in General Elections, but then the same is true of local council elections.

Reading East is Lib Dem target number 39, Labour target 20. So Labour may well be trying harder here than the LD. In 2005 is was very close between the Tories and Labour, the LD were not even close, as you can see below. Rumours are that big Labour money is getting behind Naz in Reading West in an attempt to hold on to that seat though.

2005 General Election Results


Here is the latest Poll Prediction from political betting, I've added the Greens and Ukip based on previous results.


As you can see the LD are a long way behind, actually they may do worse even than this, squeezed by the even bigger parties.

Alok Sharma, the Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Reading West, expressed disappointment at the decision by the Whitchurch Bridge Company to increase the Bridge Card Toll price from 13.89 pence to 20 pence from Monday 1st March on top of the 100% increase in the standard cost of a single crossing.

Labour MP Martin Salter has similarly opposed car drivers paying towards the cost, he went there with film crews from ITV and BBC. As has John Howell Tory MP for Henley

The Whitchurch Bridge Company implemented the current Tolls on Monday 26th October 2009, some 4 months later than it had planned for, as they had a public enquiry. They say this delay in implementing the new Tolls cost the Company about £60,000 in lost revenue. In addition, the Public Inquiry itself cost the Company about £40,000, so the Company has a shortfall of about £100,000 in the current year.
The Company has decided it has no option but to raise the Bridge Card Toll to 20p in 2010. This increase will enable the Company to recoup about £60,000 of the £100,000 shortfall by 2013, so they can afford to keep having a bridge here. Its one of the few examples of car users having to pay for their car use, usually its the rest of us paying, even people who don't have a car.

There is a considerable benefit to using a card for the toll, in cash the toll is 40p for a car, if over 3.5 tonnes mgw, up to 7.5 tonnes its £3.

Update; Clearly the rise is above inflation, but then bus fares have risen far above inflation, where is the outcry for that. Public spending should go on transport for those who can't afford cars, such as buses, trains, cycle paths and improved pedestrian facilities.
Spending millions on crash barriers when there are other ways of improving safety is a similar case; Greener safer A329(M), reduce the speed limit




The cost of motoring has fallen while the cost of public transport has risen since Labour came to power. Official figures show that the cost of motoring has fallen by 13 per cent in real terms since 1997, while bus and coach fares have increased by 17 per cent above inflation. Rail fares have risen by 7 per cent extra above inflation. This is despite the Government's pledge of cutting carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2020.

Drivers often feel that they have been unfairly targeted by the Treasury, with the duty on petrol having increased dramatically since 1997. But the rises in the costs of running a car have been more than offset by the falling cost of buying and maintaining a car in real terms. For example, a Ford Fiesta cost £9,165 when Labour came to power. Consumers can buy a similar model 12 years later for £9,995, making it much cheaper once inflation is factored in. The cost of maintenance has also fallen sharply as cars have become more reliable.

So while the car lobby often complain about rising costs of motoring; its those who don't use a car that have been hit hardest, and this includes the poorest people. Meanwhile the public transport services continue to get worse as does car congestion. You would think politicians from the big parties would have put this information together by now, if they cared to they could have.



Two sides to every story on the future of transport

1 RAC FOUNDATION: New road capacity does not simply fill up with traffic. Additional traffic may occur on new routes as less suitable roads are relieved of congestion.

GREEN PARTY: New road capacity has been shown to generate an average of one-fifth more traffic, greatly increasing climate-changing emissions. New roads lead to new journeys being taken on them.


2 RAC: Building roads will not have a significant effect on climate change, so long as wider policy measures are also introduced. Road building on its own can slightly increase carbon dioxide emissions, but it could also reduce emissions by up to 10 per cent if introduced alongside road-pricing.

GREEN: Relying on the car and pricing public transport out of the market is exactly what underlies our current worsening emissions. Of the 19 road-building projects currently planned by the Scottish Government, just one shows any carbon reduction.


3 RAC: Traffic pollution is not getting worse. Vehicle technology has reduced traffic pollution significantly.

GREEN: The most recent figures show that in 2004-5, Scotland's road transport emissions of increased by 70,000 tonnes.


4 RAC: Roads do not occupy large areas of land – they cover less than 2 per cent of the surface of Britain.

GREEN: Land for roads, such as the proposed Aberdeen bypass, is often the most beautiful and ecologically sensitive.


5 RAC: The UK is not unusual in Europe in relying on roads and has the lowest level of motorways and main roads relative to its population.

GREEN: This is spurious and ignores so many other factors, notably the higher costs of public transport in the UK.


6 RAC: Building roads will benefit low-income groups, as all income groups rely on roads for more than 92 per cent of their travel.

GREEN: Most of the poorest in society live in households without access to a car. Britain has historically had the lowest investment in public transport, leading to its excessive cost and limited services.


7 RAC: The construction industry can accommodate a substantial increase in road building.

GREEN: The construction industry would no doubt deliver any level of road-building required.


8 RAC: Roads are efficient users of space in comparison with the railways. Roads carry almost five times more passenger traffic than railways and take up only 50 per cent more land.

GREEN: Roads are more heavily used because the total cost of motoring continues to fall, despite changes to oil prices. Driving generates about three times as much per passenger mile as trains.


9 RAC: Public transport is not a ready alternative to the private car. Railways serve very distinct markets and have little room for additional passengers. Bus services cover less than 23 per cent of the road network.

GREEN: In a compact country like Britain, high-quality public transport is easily deliverable, if there (is] the political will.


10 RAC: Road traffic does pay its way. Even if road users were put in a unique position of needing to pay all of their external costs, such as pollution, congestion and for accidents, current charges are too high.

GREEN: When the effects of pollution are factored in, as they should be, these taxes cover less than half of the overall costs imposed on society.


11 RAC: Building new roads is not too costly. In many cases, the benefits of road development have vastly outweighed its costs.

GREEN: The costs of developing new roads are enormous. The Scottish Government is about to spend £6 billion on unnecessary roads.

Channel 4 Political Slot - 25th February 2010 ... Caroline Lucas on the streets of Brighton Pavilion, asking voters what they want their MP to fight for in the next Parliament.

What Do You Want Your MP To Fight For? A Fairer society, better pensions, jobs, better quality of life.....

National Bullying Helpline (NBH) was established in 2002 and acquired Charity status in 2007. NBH has traditionally been associated with workplace bullying advising both employees and employers - but recently extended its remit to cover all nature of bullying, specifically playground bullying and bullying within neighborhoods and local communities. The charity can advise and speak on a variety of issues and to become the instinctive 'port of call' for those struggling with bullying issues. NBH works with the media on issues which have a bullying element. Where confidentiality is sought it is always given - unconditionally. NBH relies on gifts and donations and operates with the support of Employers and the Voluntary sector in Wiltshire.

The National Bullying Helpline is the only Charity in the UK providing Free support in all corners of Society, whatever the nature of the bullying (abuse, physical assault, discrimination, wrongful dismissal, bullying at home or in the community, hurtful remarks, bullying in schools - both in the playground and the staff-room). Their mission is to provide professional, timely, support to those who need it. They specialize in Dispute Resolution, Mediation, Facilitation, Law and Training and Development.
So there is some irony in their being bullied by the Labour government. The attack came when Christine Pratt, NBH chief executive and founder, said staff from No 10 had contacted her. Ms Pratt was widely criticised for going public and has offered to resign. The Charity Commission has said it will prevent any more details of calls being disclosed and is also investigating the helpline after getting 160 complaints. Mrs Pratt spoke out last weekend following allegations in a book about Gordon Brown's temper and behaviour towards staff.

The Charities four patrons stepped down, and the helpline shut down, but it has since reopened. I was surprised to hear one of those patrons was Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe. Mrs Pratt has given no information about those who called her despite being challenged to do so by Labour; so it seems to me that she has kept her confidentially. Labour of course has a history of this; Dr Kelly died after they gave his name to the press. The way they behaved over Jane Griffiths lost them the seat in 2005. She said "There is a serious problem of bullying within the party in Reading".

The row began on Sunday with a story in the Observer - based on a book by journalist Andrew Rawnsley - alleging that Mr Brown grabbed staff by the lapels, shoved them aside and shouted at them.

Reading Labours bully in chief has hit out at the charity, saying 'In her haste to help the Conservatives, Mrs Pratt not only breached her duty of confidentiality but failed to stand up any of her claims.' So challenging her to reveal more while attacking her for revealing anything. Typical of Martin. As is his name calling; 'the aptly named Christine Pratt' indeed. He gets a bit confused at one point, stating ' the National Bullying Helpline, whose existence must now be in doubt.' They exist as much as the Labour party does, who will remain the longer is a question. Labour nearly went bankrupt in 2008, they became morally bankrupt some years before.

Judging by the language coming from Martin I suspect most of the complaints about this charity are from Labour supporters. In which case I suspect they will thrive, the nation certainly needs them.

The irony there being that many people in Reading have been bullied by Martin, he once threatened me with violence and also with legal action. I stood up to him and his threats proved empty. So I call on all oppressed people to stand up to the bullies; thats how to defeat them.

The bill lost by only a handful of votes. If just 4 Labour MPs had joined their 26 'rebel' colleagues they would have one. Needless to say loyalist MP Martin Salter who pretends to be a rebel voted along with the majority of his party.

Well done to those who voted for the bill, including Reading East Rob Wilson. Unfortunately 39 Tories didn't show up, along with 69 Lab. It's worth noting, as well, that the Lib Dems, who do lots of talking about the environment, saw 13 of their MPs not bothering to vote either...including Nick Clegg, Chris Huhne and Vince Cable. Inspiring. Remind me what they are paid for again?

Had they been victorious, the government would have been defeated and Parliament would have ended the era of dirty coal!

Among the Labour backbenchers who supported the new green measure were Alan Simpson, Jon Cruddas, and Colin Burgon. A few Labour MPs including Dianne Abbott, Fabian Hamilton and Austin Mitchell told climate campaigners they’d vote for the amendment but then either voted against it or abstained. Reacting to the vote, the Executive Director of Greenpeace UK, John Sauven said:
“Yesterday’s vote shows the depth of unease within the Labour party about a bill that hands billions of pounds to energy companies but fails to hold them to account. Ministers caved into lobbyists from big German utilities who claimed that this measure would scare off investment, when the evidence from places like California shows that the opposite is true. Investors want certainty. Without an emissions performance standard new power stations are subject not to a legally binding limit, but to a gentleman’s agreement that leaves an uncertain future for both investors and the UK’s climate targets.”

The bill was for an Emissions Performance Standard to apply to new electricity generation plants.
It meant a restriction on the amount of carbon dioxide that electricity generation plants can emit.

The House divided: Ayes 244, Noes 252.

Bully Brown caught on camera. Its CGI but it looks not a bit like him, it made me laugh anyway.




Not content with hurling around phones and Coke cans, the Prime Minister now stands accused of unleashing the “forces of hell” against his own Chancellor for telling what turned out to be partly the truth about the economy. Woops.

The Guardian thinks his bullying has paralysed the Labour Party.

The Pincents Hill Plan has been thrown out to rapturous applause; it was always controversial to build up to 750 homes on the edge of Reading.

West Berkshire Council's planning committee members followed their officers' recommendation to reject Blue Living's outline application for a minitown on Pincents Hill at Tilehurst, to the delight of an audience of around 200 people packed into the main hall at Little Heath School.

The developer failed to show up, instead sending solicitor Steven Turnbull who incensed councillors and officers by accusing them of being uncooperative and politicising the planning process in a cheap attempt to win votes.

Councillors labelled the developer "arrogant and disgraceful" adding: "Members take exception to the inference that they have not come here with open minds. We do not pre-determine planning applications."
.
Planning officer Clive Inwards recommended the application be rejected for a variety of reasons including its failure to adhere to the council's policy of protecting the strategic gap between Tilehurst, Calcot and Theale.

He concluded: "The application proposes inappropriate and unjustified development on a green-field site outside of the current settlement boundary. Material considerations do not outweigh the general presumption against development in the countryside."

I have blogged about my opposition to this plan here.
Save Calcott website here
Newbury Today
Reading Chronicle
Reading Post
Reading 107 FM

Three Palestinian farmers were invited here to attend Fair Trade fortnight; it should have been a proud and happy occasion. The farmers, from newly certified co-operatives, whose olive oil is the only one in the world to bear the Fairtrade mark, had been invited by the UK social enterprise Zaytoun.

They were due to arrive this week, and would have attended events in England, Scotland and Wales, meeting potential buyers here as well as Non-Governmental Organisations with an interest in fair trade and economic development.

But this welcome development has been thwarted by the British government denying them visas. What makes this denial even more galling, as tour supporters point out, is this report from a year ago:

'Gordon Brown said he was "delighted" by the launch, marking the start of Fairtrade Fortnight, the annual campaign urging people to buy goods with the internationally recognised mark designed to ensure producers from poorer countries get a fair price and long-term security.

Brown said: "Olive oil production provides an essential part of the West Bank economy. In buying this oil, British shoppers wil be helping the farmers of Palestine to make a living.'

Sign a petition to protest the ban. I think dialogue is the way to make progress, banning people solves nothing.


Reading has a variety of events for Fairtrade Fortnight. Thursday sees the Reading Green Party quiz and music night.

Today I have been contacted by 5 members of CAMRA, asking for my support for real ale, real pubs and consumer rights. I am delighted to give that support, the Green Party has for a long time supported these issues.

CAMRA campaign against pub closures, the most recent Beer & Pub Association report highlighting that 39 pubs are closing every week. In Reading the Green Party have lead the repoen the Jolly Anglers campaign.

CAMRA's own research shows that 84% of people believe a pub is as essential to village life as a shop or post office. Despite their popularity pubs are still under threat and need our help.

CAMRA is calling on everyone to join the Save Our Pubs campaign to put a stop to the closure of British pubs.

The Green Party are also against giant supermarkets selling cheap Alcohol, unfortunately the other parties have let them increase while smaller businesses suffer and sometimes close.

In Brighton, we have been campaigning on Licensing & alcohol issues.

CAMRA:
1) Promote the interests of Britain's pub goers
2) Champion well-run community pubs
3) Rebalance alcohol taxation to support beer and pubs
4) Reform the beer tie to deliver a fair deal for consumers
5) Support the role of well-run pubs as solutions to alcohol misuse

Reading CAMRA is their local branch.

So can Gordon Brown provide "a future fair for all"?

No. The richest 10% of the population are more than 100 times as wealthy as the poorest 10% of society.

He can't seem to say anything that is actually true, even his own supporters no longer trust him.

He was behind Iraq, and has yet to apologise for the many thousands that died there.
He is happy for our troops to continue to die fot no reason and kill innocents in Afghanistan.

Our economy is in a mess, he promised he had got rid of boom and bust, he got rid of the regulations that were protecting us instead.
Then he protected those who caused the mess, leaving the us to pay for a mess he was in part responsible for.
He has let some huge corporations get away with paying minimal tax while small businesses suffer.

We were promised that he would get rid of child poverty by 2020, halving it by 2010, but he failed.
He promised to reduce carbon emissions but failed. Labour's commitment to reduce emissions by 20% by 2010 was in its 1997, 2001 and 2005 manifestos.

He suggests parlimentary reform after trying to protect those who fiddled their expenses.
He offers proportional representation but too late for this parliament.

Fairness would see several Labour people either in prison of removed from politics; but I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

It would see him stand in an election, but if he did, he would loose, so expect him to delay that as long as he can. Many are expecting a poll in May, but he may well go for the latest possible date in an attempt to cling to power as long as he can.

As Adrian Ramsay said at the Green Party Conference: "How can they be trusted to be fair when bankers are still getting bonuses, yet the recession is still putting thousands of other people out of work? The people who gambled with our money, who built the house of credit cards that now has crashed, get bailed out, but everyone else picks up the bill. That doesn't sound like Fair for All. That sounds like a banker's ‘Free For All'."

Fairness is worth fighting for.