Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No it's Super Casino

Now people from all around Manchester can squander their money on a hopeless gamble that will almost certainly end in bitter disappointment.

And at full-time they can go into the casino across the road.

Are the people that decide where these big generation projects are located the same people that write Eastenders?
Only you get the impression that the only place they know about outside of London is Manchester.

Personally I thought it should have gone to Blackpool. It would have helped to revive a flagging tourist spot and would have built on a culture that was already there.
Plus if you do manage to win anything, you've probably got a better chance of making it to your car with it all.

G.P.M.G.

I managed to see an actual doctor today. Better still, I was seen earlier than my appointment time.

The doctor in question informed me that it was because no-one was turning up for their appointments. I think she said she'd spent a grand total of 40 minutes seeing patients, this was at 5pm.

Apparently it's quite widespread for people to make an appointment and then not bother showing up. I think this is appalling. I had to really fight to get to see a doctor today. Last week I could only get an appointment to see a nurse practitioner.

If you don't give your G.P. sufficient notice (e.g. 2 hours) that you aren't going to arrive for your appointment then you should be fined £6.65 (The cost of an adult prescription). You cannot make an appointment to see any G.P. in the UK until your fine has been paid.

I'm not the first to suggest this, many feel it is a bit right-wing but when you consider we live in a world of mobile phones, email etc. there really is no reason why someone can't contact their surgery to say they can't come in.

Obviously there can be mitigating circumstances (rushing to hospital, car crash etc.) but evidence of this must be provided.

I'm guessing more often than not it's brought out of laziness. Whatsmore if we get enough revenue from fines, the cost of a prescription can be brought down so that those that don't waste NHS resources can get their medicine at more affordable rates.

Common Sense Prevails

According to Downing Street there will be no exemption from the gay rights laws for catholic adoption agencies.

I can't believe the whole debacle was actually given so much debate. Quite simply you cannot sidestep anti-discrimination laws. I don't care what your views or beliefs are, discrimination is a crime.

Adoption agencies are paid tax-payers money to find parents for children. Can you honestly imagine giving other government funded departments the freedom to pick and choose what duties apply to them because of their beliefs?

Sorry, I can't perform this operation on you because blood transfusions are against my religion.

Sorry, I can't arrest your husband for beating you as according to my religion you should be executed for commiting adultery.

Sorry sir, I can't go to war today because it's a Sunday.

The list goes on. The law should be above all else... including Downing Street!

Whilst talking about the law, I can't believe that a psychotic who put a bullet into the head of his aunt, uncle and two cousins isn't being tried for murder.

I don't understand how we can have a society where you can brutally murder 4 people and not be held accountable for it?

Yes he might be mentally ill but that doesn't alter the plain facts of what he has done.

What a guy

F.A.O. The 23 'footballers' that represented England in the 2006 World Cup Finals. (Especially the egotistical pricks that released autobiographies afterwards explaining how they weren't accountable for their own piss-poor performances.)

Read this and learn about a real footballer. Think about it the next time you put your Ferrari in a ditch or buy your WAG a diamond neckless with more carrots than the Tesco fruit & veg section.

He used to play for Villa. In fact he was our best player two seasons ago so naturally DO'L dropped him completely for the following season and he left shortly before the World Cup when his contract expired.

Good on yer Ulises. Even if saying your name reminds me of a cartoon I used to watch as a kid.

Outsourcing

I don't normally post about work as their aren't that many software developers called Phill that work for HM Land Registry. However I feel I should say something about the upcoming strike action.

I would have posted earlier this week when the results of the ballot were announced but I've been unwell, to be more accurate I still am unwell despite my nurse's appointment on Thursday - I wanted to see a doctor but being a member of the working population I was deemed unworthy and so saw a jumped up nurse instead.

So we're all going on strike on Wednesday (although technically if I'm still off sick by then, I won't be) because of the following demands:

1. Guarantees of no compulsory redundancies or relocations - Not only is that a bit of a tall ask but I wouldn't trust this government if it made any such guarantee anyway. A grand total of 2 union members have so far lost their jobs through compulsory redundancy.
2. An end to unfair pay systems that see staff doing the same job paid vastly differing salaries, progression in five years and a fair national pay system - I don't care what DEFRA, RPA, The Home Office, DVLA, Customs & Excise etc. get paid compared to me. They're separate organisations as far as I'm concerned.
3. Pay increases which, at least , keep pace with the cost of living - a fairly reasonable demand but not worth striking over... yet
4. No more privatisation and outsourcing without agreements to protect the workforce - I'll rant about this in a minute.
5. Adequate resources and decent working conditions - Already have them.
6. No cuts in the civil service compensation scheme - ???

I personally think strike action is an outdated concept and can work against you in negotiations. That said I do agree in taking industrial action on this occasion because of point 4 - Outsourcing.

In a private company you outsource various aspects that either aren't your core business (e.g. cleaning staff) or you lack the expertise / manpower (e.g. a bespoke computer system if you don't have an I.T. department).

However we had to outsource our brand new Human Resources computer system because of government policy.

We had both the expertise and manpower to do it in-house but we had to pay £25 million to an external company to provide us with something that is (for lack of a better description) a sack of shit. The existing system it is replacing is better.

We have a designated human resources section of developers who already understand the existing business processes and could have produced a better system at a fraction of the cost but courtesy of government policy they weren't allowed to.

Whatsmore in the short time that I've been working here, our level of consultancy usage has increased exponentially. Now even if you're on a relatively small project it has to go via a consultant, someone that knows nothing about the system you are building so you waste even more time / money explaining it to them.

Now I'm not saying consultants don't have their uses but when you're enhancing an existing system that works on a stable architecture, you don't need them. If it's a brand new system on a completely new architecture (Like 'White Elephant' will be) then fair enough.

But the government wants more outsourcing. It doesn't matter that it costs more and results in an inferior output, it's a policy so they have to stick to it. I thought they wanted to be more like the private sector...

In the private sector if it costs you twice as much and gives you half as much back then you don't do it unless you want to go out of business.

If the government refuses to except that more PFI, outsourcing and consultancy is both expensive and ineffective then someone has to take action. Unfortunately Joe Public will probably side with the Government when we go on strike as they're brainwashed into thinking the civil service doesn't do any work.

I'm sure things could be run better but removing the public sector altogether isn't the way to achieve it.

Sports Thoughts II

So the teams in the Premier League are going to earn more money it would seem - I'm sure there are agents rubbing their hands with glee.

From what I understand, the way that the money is dished out is somewhat unfair. The team at the bottom will get £30 million and then you get an extra £1 million pounds for each position above that - the numbers might be wrong but the principle is the same.

What a rubbish system. There is a finite number of points available in the premier league (I haven't been bored enough to work out how many but I'm sure someone could) Why not divide the total amount of money by the number of points so that you get paid per point.

That way if you have a really poor season and do badly you get very little whereas if you fight to stay up until the very end then you'll earn quite a bit more. Likewise if there is one or two teams that are head and shoulders above everyone else (which is certainly the case this season) then the amount of money they earn compared to everyone else will reflect that.

If clubs are smart then they will link their players wages to the bonus they get so that all the players are motivated to get the points. Then you won't get a bunch of spoilt wasters that decide they'll just take the money rather than earning it, then leave in the summer when the club gets relegated and can't afford their wages anymore - This appears to be the attitude with a lot of the players at Charlton. It has certainly been the case with relegated teams in the past.

While I'm on the subject of sport I suppose I really should mention the cricket... there you go.

Lack of Perspective

I was watching the BBC Six O'Clock news today and their main story was understanderbly the devastation caused by yesterday's high winds.

However I was left feeling disgusted when one of their main reports was about a middle-aged woman in Kidderminster who'd been without power for 24 hours.

Woop-dee-doo

The woman was complaining that it wasn't good enough 'considering all the money I pay for my electricity'. She had gas heaters and cooking hobs and still had running water. Her primary concern seemed to be that she was worried her milk might go off because the fridge didn't work.

Just before this item they were showing repair crews who had admitted they were 'stretched' as there were problems all over the country.

People died yesterday, others have lost their children/parents etc. Have some fucking perspective.

I've 'suffered' worse myself:

In 1990 we lost our power and water supply for 48 hours. It was due to a blizzard so it was a damn site colder than it is right now and we had no heating because we needed electricity to work the boiler and pump. But we didn't grumble (much) and just got on with coping. Everyone else around us was in the same boat and we certainly weren't blaming the electricity companies - we'd had freak weather, shit happens. The most bizarre aspect of the weekend was having a barbecue in six inches of snow.

It's one thing to have some whinging old cow moaning that she's got no power when others have got bigger problems but which stupid twat decided to put her on the national news?

Big Bother

Everyone else is talking about the 'racism' in Big Brother so I thought I'd be boring and join in.

I would like to say a big well done to Channel 4 for sinking to all new lows in television by creating this storm in a teacup in the first place.

If you stick a bunch of people in a house filled with cameras and microphones and record everything they say 24/7 then you can portray any kind of story you like in a 30 minute edit.

A few years back there was a contestant called Adele that they made out to be two-faced because she said nasty things about people behind their backs. But she always maintained that she said nice things just as often.

The ingredients here are the same - bitchy young women in a competitive environment. Of the comments I've heard, nothing suggests racism. Just bitchiness and stupidity. Yes especially stupidity.

At around about the same time that this is all going on Herschelle Gibbs is given a two match ban for shouting out racial abuse to Pakistan fans.

Is it racial abuse rather than just plain abuse because:

a) He's a white South African
b) They're from Pakistan
c) There is a hidden meaning behind the 'go back to the zoo' comment.

His comments should be taken at face value. He called them a bunch of animals and told them to go back to the zoo. That's where animals live, the zoo. The conduct of the Pakistan crowd at the time was appropriate for the comment:

There was an incident where Makhaya [Ntini] was hit on the head by a Pakistan
flag going up the stairs.

Ntini is black so surely that attack must be racist?

It is wrong to abuse the crowd regardless of what they've done but don't trump up the offense just because they happen to be from a different ethnic background.

Back to Big Brother, I had actually been watching a bit of it on Sunday as I was curious as to how Dirk Benedict would be like in 'real life' but now that this has happened I intend to boycott it. Simply because I see this as a ratings ploy and nothing more and I for one don't intend to fall for it.

As for those involved, the ones making the comments have effectively committed career suicide and Shilpa Shetty will hopefully manage to capitalise out of it all when she gets out. She almost certainly isn't even aware that this is going on.

Anyway, lets stop talking about shit TV and get onto important matters such as 300 years of the UK. I for one am a fan of devolution so when is England going to get it's own parliament? Put it in Birmingham.

I'll take that as a no then

Ever since I signed my name on the e-petition to "Scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy" I've been keeping an eye on it to see how it develops.

When I signed up both it and the hunting act stood at around 14000 signatures.

At the time of writing it stands at a wopping 272,301 signatures with the 2nd most popular petition (Still the hunting act) only increasing to 18,707.

Given that one of the other petitions on there is the national id card I would like to think that this sends a very strong message to Downing Street about how unpopular this proposal is. They'll probably ignore it though.

The only spin they could possibly put on this is that roughly 59,750,000 haven't signed it so this is still a minority.

But if you consider how militant the countryside alliance is (They fudged a radio 4 poll about acts you'd like to see repealed) then someone in Downing Street must realise that given the enormous difference in numbers between the two, opposition to this will be considerably worse if it is pursued.

Sign up if you haven't already, there's a little over a month left.

Home Office

Just a quick comment about the latest home office fuck up:

Arse!

Maybe if they moved it out of London they'd stand a chance of attracting someone semi-competent for the below-average salaries on offer.

As it stands the home office is making the rest of the civil service look worse than it actually is*

This must piss EDS off no end as that's normally their job!

* With the exception of the CSA which let's be honest was fighting a losing battle from day one.

On a seperate note a friend sent me this link. At least the French know what the rest of Europe thinks of them and can have a laugh about it.

Chin Up Lads

Ok so Villa lost and are out of the cup but lets be honest, United were a bunch of jammy wankers.

Yes they created a lot of chances but they squandered nearly all of them. They only looked like scoring on two occasions other than the goals. Villa didn't create that many chances but the ones they had were 'clear-cut'.

I said to my brother before the game kicked off that Villa were due a shit ref as we hadn't had one so far this season and sure enough he delivered. Inconsistent and biased, he was always looking to give something to United. And on the subject of officials, where did the 4 minutes come from? Both linesman were good though. It's saying something about the standard of refereeing this season that this is the first time I've had a whinge. And it was a game at Old Trafford.

Didn't like the commentator either but then I never have since he worked at Channel 5 and did 'Robot Wars'. He sounds like he's permenantly constipated. When United were 1-0 up and the number of chances (in total, not on target) were brought up as 22-4 he had to say 'I can't even remember the 4 that Villa have had'
Can you remember Baros sticking the ball in the back of the net you biased cunt !?!

At the end of the day though we made the ground sound like Villa Park (i.e. half empty) and every player gave it their all. The United support showed what a bunch of glory hunting tossers they are as they didn't start singing until after the first goal was scored.

Hopefully we can dip into the transfer market this week and give them the chinning they deserve on Saturday.

I would like to congratulate JLloyd Samuel. Ok he made one or two of slack passes but it's good to see him coming back and he did manage to clatter Christiano Ronaldo in a clean tackle! Shame the other ten players couldn't follow suit.

There are apparently rumours that Villa are attempting to sign Shaun Wright-Phillips, what have I started?

Swapsies

If it's true that Chelsea are after Baros then Villa should look at getting Shaun Wright-Phillips in exchange.

My shopping list is as follows:

A Right-Back - Preferably Luke Young but why not wait five months and get him cheaper? It looks like we might be getting Bardsley from United. Not sure whether it's a loan or a permanant deal though.

A Right-Winger - S.W-P. is my preferred choice but we should at least try to talk to David Beckham. If he really wants to get back in the England squad he'll stand a better chance playing regular football at Villa than warming the bench at Real Madrid. I don't think we'll get Milner now so I'd rule him out. Hendrie didn't play for Stoke today so it's possible he'll be coming straight back into the first team (if he comes back).

A Striker (or two) - If we get a good right-winger then Gabby can play up front so we'd only need one striker. I think Marlon Harewood would be a good signing or Darren Bent. They're both the kind of striker we're looking for (fast and powerful). We stand a better chance of getting Harewood as West Ham have got strikers coming out of their ears. A guy I work with refers to Harewood as a 'fluffer' (I don't think he knows what the word means in adult conversation) because he misses so many chances. I think it's all about confidence. He was unstoppable last season and if anyone can get him to play like that again it's Martin O'Neill.

Champagne Supernova

It's not every day something that happened 200 yards from your house makes the news. It's even rarer that it's something as amusing as this. Talk about a Darwin Award in the waiting.

What I don't understand is why would anyone steal a Vauxhall Nova?

Only in Plymouth...

Union Bollocks

I am a civil servant. When I started work for my employer (HM Land Registry) I decided to join the union (PCS).

Although I have no problems with the local executive as they tend not to get in the way like most unions do (We're an I.T. provider so they all understand the concept of "change"), I've been getting more and more disturbed by the left-wing ethos of my union as a whole (or all unions for that matter).

It's looking like we'll be going on strike for something completely unconnected to our workplace (or our entire organisation for that matter). Although we're classed as civil servants, we're part of a trading fund so are isolated from the rest of the civil service. However they still expect us to strike for them.
The government wants to make some civil servants redundant where they aren't needed and rather than providing evidense that they clearly are needed (if indeed they are) the union just wants to go on strike.
I don't see the point of striking over pay or redundancies. Strike action should be reserved for extreme circumstances such as dangerous working practices that put staff at risk or similar. And I certainly don't believe in sympathy striking. The civil service is an enormous employer, why should I be expected to stop working because DEFRA is overstaffed? It has fuck all to do with me!

That's not the reason why I'm thinking of jacking my membership in though. This is.

What the link doesn't say is that the union will be campaigning in all areas of the country where the BNP is a threat.

I will make this next point very clear: I think the BNP are scum. As a result I will never ever vote for them.

I don't want my union (that I pay a subscription to) spending money on campaigning against a political party. They are a union, not a political party. They are meant to use their resources to serve their members interests not act as a lobby group for their own political views.

The BNP are entitled to their beliefs and opinions like anyone else (no matter how wrong they are - which they clearly are as they differ to mine). It is only if they incite a criminal act (e.g. Shout 'Bomb, Bomb Pakistan' or 'Bomb, Bomb India' during a march) that they should be stopped and describing Islam as 'a wicked faith' hardly does this.

If the turnouts are as low as predicted (18%) then it is indeed likely that the far right will benefit.

However if the BNP get voted in to your area because you can't be bothered to get off your arse to put a cross on a piece of paper then you deserve everything you get. Why should my money be wasted on this?

On a slightly different note I decided today that I'm a Liberal Capitalist. I'm thinking about setting up my own political party as I don't think there's an existing one that shares my core belief:

"Let's make it work better - providing it's legal, we don't care how"

Any takers? First volunteer gets to be Shadow Chancellor.

Sports Thoughts

I was going to put in a post yesterday about England loosing 5-0 but I wasn't feeling very well.

Firstly I would like to congratulate Australia for a thoroughly deserved 5-0 win that is a worthy end to their era as the world's best side in test cricket.

Secondly (If the first point doesn't make it clear enough) I think this series was the blip not the series in 2005.

When we play them next in 2009 they will no longer have Shane Warne and Glen McGrath. Obviously there are other players that will no longer be playing (Definately Langer, possibly Gilchrist and Hayden) but these two are quite simply different class.

Warne is the best ever Leg spin bowler and officially the highest run scorer to never get a test century. He cannot be replaced.

Saying McGrath is the best ever fast bowler would be difficult as there have been so many greats (and there will be many more in the future). But he is definately the best of his era. No-one else has been as consistently accurate as him. Even when he doesn't get wickets, he won't give the batsmen anything to score off.

No matter what the Australians say about new players coming in for 2009 like Clarke and Tait, they will not be of their class... yet. It's no coincidence that since they've come on the scene Australia have enjoyed an unprecidented spell of dominence in the Ashes (Warne's Ashes debut was 1991 with the famous Gatting delivery, until 2005 we hadn't won the Ashes until the series beforehand in 1989). You could argue that their dominance is as much about them batting at 4 per over but it's easier to play this risky form of cricket when you know you've got the bowlers there to back it up.

Anyway enough about the Aussies, what about us?

Personally I don't particularly care about the score being 5-0 instead of 4-1 or 4-0. It makes no difference, we were well beaten from the very beginning of the series. So why was this? I think it was down to a number of contributing factors:

1. Missing players - How you can expect a side to compete to the same standard when two key players were missing altogether (Simon Jones and Captain Fantastic), another two were unfit (Flintoff and Giles) and another lost the plot (Trescothick) is beyond me. Imagine Australia without Brett Lee, Ricky Ponting and Justin Langer and with Warne and McGrath playing while unfit (Although you'd struggle to notice the difference with Warne). Given how even at full strength we had to pull out all the stops to just about beat a complacent Australia in 2005, at half strength we were only ever going to lose to an Australian side determined to make amends.

2. Poor preperation - Regardless of what I've just said, the other factors that led to our demise were unexcusable. A week's preperation going into a test series is piss poor end of story.

3. Wrong Captain - I personally don't rate Flintoff as a captain. I think a captain earns his money in the field when he alternates the bowling. Flintoff struggles in this aspect as he takes on too much for himself. Saying that, it isn't because of my personal rating that I think he was the wrong choice. Andrew Strauss was the Captain in the last test series and England had done well. He CAN rotate the bowlers effectively and more importantly the momentum was with him going into the Ashes. By changing the captaincy, that momentum was lost.

4. Poor selection - Why would you pick a player that hasn't even played for a year ahead of someone who demolished the summer opposition? I'm a big fan of Ashley Giles (he does occasionally play for Warwickshire after all) but he shouldn't have even been put in that position in the first place. Panesar may not be as good with the bat but he's there primarily to bowl the opposition out (which he does very well). And why drop Geraint Jones for Reid in the summer only to pick him again despite Reid being a success?
I can understand dropping players when they're playing badly but not when they're playing well, it's just stupid!

Conclusion - We were always going to lose this series but too many other mistakes were made that I find hard to swallow. It's looking like Fletcher is going to take the fall for it but I think that would be a mistake. We've had a fantastic run of (mostly) wins since he's come on board so to get rid of him for this setback would be stupid. Steve McClaren said his job wouldn't start until England lost (Probably the most sensible thing he's said as England Manager) and the same is true for Fletcher. This is sport not politics.

On a seperate note I would like to say a big thanks to Crystal Palace for not only lending us Kiraly in the first place but allowing him to play for us in the F.A. Cup tomorrow. We'll lose anyway but our chances are much improved with a goalkeeper playing. It's a shame Liverpool can't be so honourable to Charlton.

Soap Box Part I

I was reading PC Bloggs again today and found myself ranting about modern government's obsession for reform.

I got a great book for Christmas called "Governing Britain Since 1945". I haven't read the book all the way through yet (The fact that I find it so interesting proves that I must be getting old!) but there is a definite theme of two seperate ages of Britain since 1945.

The second age started in 1979, a notable year for two reasons:

1. I was born
2. Thatcher came into power.

Since the second age began (I'm trying to make this sound a bit like 'Lord of the Rings') there has been a rapid increase in the rate of change of laws, working practices etc. There was a relatively sedate period during the Major years but Blair is as bad if not worse as Her.

When the whole 'joining the Euro' debate started, Gordon Brown announced that he wanted the single currency to pass five tests. It never did, most likely because there was no way of actually measuring these mythical five tests.

But it does bring up a good point. If I ruled the country I would like my administration to have a set of tests in place for any new legislation we plan to introduce:

1. Do we need it? - A solution is for a problem not vice-versa. ID cards are a good example of this. Yes they could be fairly useful but it's an enormous expense for something the Government seems to be unable to justify.

2. Do we already have it? - A classic example of this is the law against using a mobile phone whilst driving. The Police were already able to knick you for 'Driving without due care and consideration'.

3. Can we enforce it? - The Hunting Act 2004 was a very popular act when it was brought in but was somewhat pointless as the police have no way to effectively enforce it. If the dogs are out on a 'Drag Hunt' and catch a scent of a live fox, how exactly are the Police supposed to:
a)Know?
b)Stop them?
c)Prove it in court?

4. Have we piloted it successfully? - Rather than trying to computerise the entire NHS, it might have made more sense to start with one hospital and build up from there. Although pilot studies are carried out, they have little bearing on whether or not the changes are fully implemented. The Poll Tax is the ultimate example of this. Piloted in Scotland where it failed but was then brought in nationally anyway.

5. Is this the easiest way? - My personal favourite. You should always look for the simplest solution to your problem. Why bother with a very expensive and incredibly complex vehicle tracking system when fuel tax will have roughly the same effect but with much less effort/cost?
Working tax credits are notorious for their complexity and errors. There must be a simpler way of calculating them?
NASA spent millions of dollars developing a pen that worked in space only to discover that the Russians used a pencil!

6. Is it fit for purpose? - Trying to incentivise the Police force or the NHS sounds like a good idea but:
The core mission of the Police is to uphold the law, not produce good stats.
The sole purpose of the NHS is to heal the sick not stick to their budget (which is undermined everytime Tessa Jowell opens her gob about Herceptin).
Likewise Public Transport is about getting people to work not being profitable. Schools are for giving children an education not teaching them how to pass a test and roadside emergency telephones are there in the event of an emergency, they aren't meant to be in constant use.

On a seperate note, Blair always talks about the public sector being more like the private sector but no private company carries on with something if it's loosing more money than it's worth. Whereas the list is as long as your arm for the UK government (past and present):

Millenium Dome
Eurofighter
Jubilee Line Extension
SA80
Westland Apache
NHS Computer System
CSA Computer System
Inland Revenue Computer System

and coming soon...

National ID Card
National Vehicle Tracking System
2012 Olympics

I'll get off my soapbox for now.

Same old shit

Once again when looking at the problem of dangerous drivers the same old solutions are touted.

Making the driving test harder will not fix the problem of younger drivers having more fatal accidents. The problem is what happens after you pass your test. You should be required to periodically take a retest. I would suggest every 12 months for the first 5 years and then every 10 years thereafter. Getting a license is hard but keeping it is easy... says the person who looses it if he gets another 3 points before June.

And while I'm on the subject:

Get rid of speedbumps (or at the very least produce a legal standard for them - I don't mind the raised road sections as you can drive over them without damaging your shock absorbers - £700 MOT this year, £500 due to speedbump damage).

They cause (often unavoidable) damage to your car, they create extra noise and vehicles pollute more because they have to gear down to get over them. Worse still they have a negative impact on response times for emergency services. Therefore the benefit they can bring to the locals is offset by the risk they create.

If you can't go over them at the road's speed limit then the limit is the problem, not the driver.

Whatsmore why should the sensible majority be punished for the irresponsible minority?

Why can't there be a phone line / website where you can submit the registration of someone you've seen driving dangerously (and a description of the act or better still some mobile phone video) and then when a driver gets enough 'hits' the police tail them in an unmarked car. If they catch them doing something reckless they can nick the driver and crush their car (Typically a Vauxhall Corsa or Peugeot 306 with a penis-envy exhaust).

Better still, charge people to smash up the cars with large mallets - I'd love to do that. Especially if the car in question belonged to some tosser that nearly crashed in to me because they were too busy texting their mate to worry about driving on the motorway.

I also think we should get rid of fixed speed cameras (not just because I was stupid enough to get caught by one). More and more drivers ram their feet on the brakes when they see the dashed lines, more often than not they're below the speed limit at the time but do so out of habit. Drivers like myself who are now 'once bitten, twice shy' divert their attention away from the road and onto the speedometer instead. There is no evidence to support their effectiveness so get rid of them.

Finally, drastically reduce the amount of time that someone can drive around on a foreign license. Instead of a year it should be more like a month. If the person in question has made arrangements for a U.K. test (or lessons building up to one) then they can have a temporary license until then.

Exemptions should be made for licenses aquired in countries that have similar or superior standards to our own but there are too many countries that have little or nothing in the way of assessment and yet people can drive in this country with Mickey Mouse licenses. The Pole down the road from me drives a Polish licensed BMW 5 series like a complete nutcase and it's only a matter of time before he kills someone doing it.

Life line

I was watching 'Spotlight' (BBC South West news magazine) this evening and was absolutely horrified when I heard about plans to get rid of emergency phones on the North Devon Link Road.

The fact that ANY money was spent on calls last year proves that they are being used. Mobile phone coverage in rural areas is patchy at best as it is done by population coverage, not geographical coverage. So removing these emergency land lines will put anyone that travels down that road at risk.

It's truly shocking how far politicians are prepared to go to save money. £7000 is peanuts when you consider the difference that not having them could make.

Admittedly it isn't as isolated a stretch of road as the A30 which clips Dartmoor and Bodmin Moor but I still wouldn't like to be stuck in the middle of nowhere without knowing how to get help. Those orange boxes provide reassurance if nothing else when you're driving alone.