I want to share this bit of good news with everyone: according to the Glasgow Herald today, Scotland's health boards have achieved their targets for the fourth year in a row!
Isn't that wonderful?
Sadly, the targets we're looking at are for efficiency savings. I might be more encouraged if the targets were for reducing waiting lists for operations or giving patients access to - for example, physio in less than the average of 7 weeks it takes in my health board area - or improving access to specialist nurses rather than cutting the numbers of nursing and medical staff and closing wards.
But hey, we can't have everything, so we'll just have to accept - again, according to today's Herald - that NHS patients may have to be sent abroad because their local hospitals can't meet the legal requirement of operating within 12 weeks. And we'll have to live with the knowledge that places like Yorkhill (same source) will continue to rely on fundraising by patients and their families. And that breast-screening will continue to be the one-size-fits-all provision it is, instead of more money being put into research to ensure 4,000 women a year in the UK avoid unnecessary surgery (the Herald again).
A saving's a saving. however pointless it may look to me.
And by the way, is the Herald really worth
£1.10 a throw? Not buying it would be a wee saving for me and might reduce my blood pressure, which must go sky-high when I read their reports on the NHS: thin on facts and devoid of any kind of critical comment.
Tuesday 30 October 2012
Monday 29 October 2012
Hello out there!
I've done nothing all day today except read and, after looking at the TV schedules and the weather forecast, I may just carry on reading for most of this week.
Right now, I'm getting to the end of Blind Eye by Stuart McBride:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_9?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=blind+eye+stuart+macbride&sprefix=Blind+Eye%2Cstripbooks%2C154
I also have half a dozen books waiting on my tablet.
If you don't hear from me between now and Xmas, can you just check my blinds and make sure I'm in here reading and not lying dead behind the door!?
Right now, I'm getting to the end of Blind Eye by Stuart McBride:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_9?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=blind+eye+stuart+macbride&sprefix=Blind+Eye%2Cstripbooks%2C154
I also have half a dozen books waiting on my tablet.
If you don't hear from me between now and Xmas, can you just check my blinds and make sure I'm in here reading and not lying dead behind the door!?
Sunday 28 October 2012
Savile - it ain't over yet!
Three points:
- How many rock/pop 'stars', DJs and other showbiz hangers-on are now cackin themselves, waiting for the polis to knock on their doors?
- Is there some kind of competition going on to get to the highest number of Savile victims? I hear there may be more than 300. Folks, one is too many.
- I'll bet the newspapers are thrilled to bits to have our attention taken off the phone-hacking scandal.
- And the media groups that hate the BBC (Murdoch, ITV, etc) must be delighted.
Sorry, that was four. And I can probably come up with a few more.....
- How many rock/pop 'stars', DJs and other showbiz hangers-on are now cackin themselves, waiting for the polis to knock on their doors?
- Is there some kind of competition going on to get to the highest number of Savile victims? I hear there may be more than 300. Folks, one is too many.
- I'll bet the newspapers are thrilled to bits to have our attention taken off the phone-hacking scandal.
- And the media groups that hate the BBC (Murdoch, ITV, etc) must be delighted.
Sorry, that was four. And I can probably come up with a few more.....
Supermarket Etiquette
Nobody likes shopping in supermarkets. Customers are there because it's the only shopping method available (online not being option for most people). Most of the staff are there, not because they are temperamentally suited to the service industry, but because they need the money. The least we can all do is share a few simple rules to make shopping as painless as possible:
- Have a bit of thought for the rest of the world. If you're older, shop mid-morning or mid-afternoon to avoid the lunch and teatime rush when people get off work. When the shop's quieter, there might be time to exchange a few nice words with the check-out staff. Ask them when they finish - if it's not for hours, sympathise. Hope they'll be kept busy - time passes faster if you're busy.
If you're younger but in a hurry, try planning better. Do you really need to be buying tonight's tea tonight? Or feel free to use the self-service aisle. The rest of us hate it.
Do you really have to go out shopping mob-handed? The supermarket isn't a family outing - surely you can do more interesting things than this with your kids? If there are two adults and you have to go out shopping together, let one take the kids to the cafe for coke and crisps while the other shops. If one of your kids starts screaming the place down, stop shopping and pay attention to the kid, ffs. They're your first responsibility, not the corn flakes.
- In the car park, try to avoid people pushing trolleys. You could slow down to the 10mph suggested on the warning sign - or even stop to let them cross the road. In fact, painted lines on the road mean you have to stop. You may not intend to hit us, but some of us slower-moving folk (oldies, people with small children, folk pushing wheelchairs, staff pushing long lines of trolleys) are a wee bit worried at how fast you drive.
- If you're being served at the deli counter or the fish bit, say 'Please' and 'Thank you' to the serving staff. They have a thankless job, are on their feet all day and have to dress up in ridiculous hats, so the least we can do is appreciate the service. Oh, and teach your weans to use these words as well. There's enough grabbing and grunting going on in the world as it is. It's a bonus if the serving staff can say 'Thank you' back. Saying 'Cheerio' to each other is nice. Try it.
- Try to avoid abandoning your trolley across the aisle, making it hard for other people to get by with theirs.
- If you dunt someone in the back with your basket - or run over their feet with your trolley - say 'Sorry'. Just the same as you would if you bumped into them in the street. It's only one word. Doesn't cost anything. Doesn't cease to exist just because you're in a shop.
- If someone is looking closely at stuff on a shelf that you want to get to, either wait or say 'Excuse me.' Do not push in and grab. These are two other wee words that are not used enough in shops.
- At the checkout, if you can see the pin number the person in front of you is keying in, you're too damn close. Back off a step or two.
- If you're a member of staff, smile. They do it in M&S and Whole Foods and Waitrose. It's quite often what brings customers back and keeps you in a job. If a customer asks a question and you don't know the answer, don't say: 'I don't know.' Say 'I don't know but we can find out' and hand them over to customer services.
- Finally, let's remember shops will be busy at Xmas and New Year. It's also worth while reminding ourselves the shops are only shut for a day at these times. Shop early: don't turn up at Asda in Govan at midnight on Xmas Eve expecting to pick yourself up a turkey and a few last minute prezzies. Supermarket staff also have families who would like to see them.
I'd say happy shopping but I'd be lying. Tolerable shopping might be as much as we can hope for.
- Have a bit of thought for the rest of the world. If you're older, shop mid-morning or mid-afternoon to avoid the lunch and teatime rush when people get off work. When the shop's quieter, there might be time to exchange a few nice words with the check-out staff. Ask them when they finish - if it's not for hours, sympathise. Hope they'll be kept busy - time passes faster if you're busy.
If you're younger but in a hurry, try planning better. Do you really need to be buying tonight's tea tonight? Or feel free to use the self-service aisle. The rest of us hate it.
Do you really have to go out shopping mob-handed? The supermarket isn't a family outing - surely you can do more interesting things than this with your kids? If there are two adults and you have to go out shopping together, let one take the kids to the cafe for coke and crisps while the other shops. If one of your kids starts screaming the place down, stop shopping and pay attention to the kid, ffs. They're your first responsibility, not the corn flakes.
- In the car park, try to avoid people pushing trolleys. You could slow down to the 10mph suggested on the warning sign - or even stop to let them cross the road. In fact, painted lines on the road mean you have to stop. You may not intend to hit us, but some of us slower-moving folk (oldies, people with small children, folk pushing wheelchairs, staff pushing long lines of trolleys) are a wee bit worried at how fast you drive.
- If you're being served at the deli counter or the fish bit, say 'Please' and 'Thank you' to the serving staff. They have a thankless job, are on their feet all day and have to dress up in ridiculous hats, so the least we can do is appreciate the service. Oh, and teach your weans to use these words as well. There's enough grabbing and grunting going on in the world as it is. It's a bonus if the serving staff can say 'Thank you' back. Saying 'Cheerio' to each other is nice. Try it.
- Try to avoid abandoning your trolley across the aisle, making it hard for other people to get by with theirs.
- If you dunt someone in the back with your basket - or run over their feet with your trolley - say 'Sorry'. Just the same as you would if you bumped into them in the street. It's only one word. Doesn't cost anything. Doesn't cease to exist just because you're in a shop.
- If someone is looking closely at stuff on a shelf that you want to get to, either wait or say 'Excuse me.' Do not push in and grab. These are two other wee words that are not used enough in shops.
- At the checkout, if you can see the pin number the person in front of you is keying in, you're too damn close. Back off a step or two.
- If you're a member of staff, smile. They do it in M&S and Whole Foods and Waitrose. It's quite often what brings customers back and keeps you in a job. If a customer asks a question and you don't know the answer, don't say: 'I don't know.' Say 'I don't know but we can find out' and hand them over to customer services.
- Finally, let's remember shops will be busy at Xmas and New Year. It's also worth while reminding ourselves the shops are only shut for a day at these times. Shop early: don't turn up at Asda in Govan at midnight on Xmas Eve expecting to pick yourself up a turkey and a few last minute prezzies. Supermarket staff also have families who would like to see them.
I'd say happy shopping but I'd be lying. Tolerable shopping might be as much as we can hope for.
Friday 26 October 2012
Lest we forget
Do you get emails and Facebook messages about supporting the annual Poppy Appeal? I do too. I'm always surprised at the tone of these messages, usually along these lines: I'm buying a poppy to support our service personnel and "I don't care who's offended by that."
It's ok - I'm not offended. I don't wear a poppy myself. I used to buy a white one from the Peace Pledge Union but I don't know where to get them any more.
So why don't I wear a poppy? It's got nothing to do with supporting our service personnel (or with wanting our troops brought back from Afghanistan - tomorrow if possible). I don't come from a service family, but my grandfather served in the army and was at Gallipoli in World War 1. My father was in the navy in WW2, on warships that escorted merchant vessels anywhere from Gibraltar to Simonstown in South Africa and all points in between. Neither of them was injured but they were certainly marked by their war service. Adjusting to everyday life after war service (4 years in one case, 5 years in the other) wasn't easy for them, and I don't suppose it was easy for many others either.
I remember my father's friend Harry C who had been a prisoner of the Japanese in Burma. He never talked about his war service but was known to have periods when he couldn't work, didn't eat and shut himself away from family and friends. He was in a mental hospital several times. He told my father he had flashbacks - he saw and heard vivid scenes from his wartime experiences - right up to the end of his life.
Was there support for ex-service people like him? I don't think so.
I know that kind of support exists in the US. The US system is called the Veterans' Administration. It offers nationwide health provision for ex-service people. It is funded by federal government and provides support for their mental as well as physical health. I know of people being looked after by the VA today who were injured in the Vietnam War in the 60s.
The VA doesn't depend on contributions to charity or selling poppies: aftercare is an entitlement, not a gift. If we take our support for service personnel seriously - and surely we must with so many seriously injured young people, often disabled for life, being returned to civilian life from Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 10 years - then we have to put their entitlement on a firm footing and stop behaving as if raising £50 million is a tremendous act of unselfishness on our part instead of what it is - a drop in the ocean when you're trying to rehabilitate and support sick and wounded ex-service people.
Of course, it's more than Starbucks paid in taxes last year. Anybody want to tackle that one? And I suppose we should be grateful that at least the poppy appeal is no longer named after one of the most incompetent commanding officers the British army has ever known. But the poor haphazard support we're offering now isn't right and we need to fix it. So buy a poppy if you want but write to your MP, your MSP, your MEP - anyone you can think of - and ask them to support the establishment of a VA here in the UK.
It's ok - I'm not offended. I don't wear a poppy myself. I used to buy a white one from the Peace Pledge Union but I don't know where to get them any more.
So why don't I wear a poppy? It's got nothing to do with supporting our service personnel (or with wanting our troops brought back from Afghanistan - tomorrow if possible). I don't come from a service family, but my grandfather served in the army and was at Gallipoli in World War 1. My father was in the navy in WW2, on warships that escorted merchant vessels anywhere from Gibraltar to Simonstown in South Africa and all points in between. Neither of them was injured but they were certainly marked by their war service. Adjusting to everyday life after war service (4 years in one case, 5 years in the other) wasn't easy for them, and I don't suppose it was easy for many others either.
I remember my father's friend Harry C who had been a prisoner of the Japanese in Burma. He never talked about his war service but was known to have periods when he couldn't work, didn't eat and shut himself away from family and friends. He was in a mental hospital several times. He told my father he had flashbacks - he saw and heard vivid scenes from his wartime experiences - right up to the end of his life.
Was there support for ex-service people like him? I don't think so.
I know that kind of support exists in the US. The US system is called the Veterans' Administration. It offers nationwide health provision for ex-service people. It is funded by federal government and provides support for their mental as well as physical health. I know of people being looked after by the VA today who were injured in the Vietnam War in the 60s.
The VA doesn't depend on contributions to charity or selling poppies: aftercare is an entitlement, not a gift. If we take our support for service personnel seriously - and surely we must with so many seriously injured young people, often disabled for life, being returned to civilian life from Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 10 years - then we have to put their entitlement on a firm footing and stop behaving as if raising £50 million is a tremendous act of unselfishness on our part instead of what it is - a drop in the ocean when you're trying to rehabilitate and support sick and wounded ex-service people.
Of course, it's more than Starbucks paid in taxes last year. Anybody want to tackle that one? And I suppose we should be grateful that at least the poppy appeal is no longer named after one of the most incompetent commanding officers the British army has ever known. But the poor haphazard support we're offering now isn't right and we need to fix it. So buy a poppy if you want but write to your MP, your MSP, your MEP - anyone you can think of - and ask them to support the establishment of a VA here in the UK.
Wednesday 24 October 2012
Is it me?
Am I the only person who has noticed the amazing amount of free advertising being given to one huge multi-national company this week? Every newspaper, magazine, TV station and news website has been publicising - free of charge - this company's newest gadget.
The gadget has just been launched in order to cash in on the lucrative Xmas market, despite the fact the company claimed till fairly recently they would never get into this area of IT - I guess greed will win out every time - and just 6 months after the last big innovation was launched - again, with huge amounts of free publicity.
This is a company with a very iffy reputation in some parts of the world. Remember the awful working conditions and high suicide rates in its Chinese factories?
Fifteen years ago, the only place this company could sell its products was education. It was definitely a niche market. Its products were and remain good-looking but very, very expensive compared to other companies'.
Now, it seems to be intent on gobbling up all its rivals: Samsung, Kindle - the lot. And the media seem to be helping. It wasn't a good idea for Miscrsoft to corner the market in software - and it's definitely not a good idea for Apple (there, I said it!) to dominate the hand-held device market so completely. We'll be sorry.....
The gadget has just been launched in order to cash in on the lucrative Xmas market, despite the fact the company claimed till fairly recently they would never get into this area of IT - I guess greed will win out every time - and just 6 months after the last big innovation was launched - again, with huge amounts of free publicity.
This is a company with a very iffy reputation in some parts of the world. Remember the awful working conditions and high suicide rates in its Chinese factories?
Fifteen years ago, the only place this company could sell its products was education. It was definitely a niche market. Its products were and remain good-looking but very, very expensive compared to other companies'.
Now, it seems to be intent on gobbling up all its rivals: Samsung, Kindle - the lot. And the media seem to be helping. It wasn't a good idea for Miscrsoft to corner the market in software - and it's definitely not a good idea for Apple (there, I said it!) to dominate the hand-held device market so completely. We'll be sorry.....
Monday 22 October 2012
Calling time on Time
I think when the dust settles on the US presidential election, I'll be calling time on Time Magazine.
Not that the relationship has been a disappointment - in fact, it has often been very rewarding - with good items about the US and from places as widespread as Mongolia, north Africa and Venezuela. And excellent writers, especially on politics and economics.
But in the past year I've noticed the magazine has a new art editor and it has become more and more difficult to read. Tiny type - looks like font size 5 or 6 at times, even when there's plenty of space available on the page. Headlines and sometimes even articles in pale blue, green or pink. Even worse, red or white type against a black background - how on earth do dyslexics cope with that?
But in the past year I've noticed the magazine has a new art editor and it has become more and more difficult to read. Tiny type - looks like font size 5 or 6 at times, even when there's plenty of space available on the page. Headlines and sometimes even articles in pale blue, green or pink. Even worse, red or white type against a black background - how on earth do dyslexics cope with that?
The last straw was a first rate article two weeks ago describing how the two presidential candidates routinely misrepresent each other in print and on TV: even with a reading light behind me and the occasional help of a magnifying glass, this wasn't a comfortable read. And if I'm paying for the magazine, I want it to be what suits me!
Now if I can just get Virgin Media to dump the crap email layout they claim is forced on them by Google, my reading life will be just dandy!
Sunday 21 October 2012
Don't believe all you read!
If I only ever read the headlines on websites like BBC News, Sky News, the Daily Mail, the Herald and so on, I would think Wales was some sort of hell-hole: a wee girl abducted and apparently murdered in Machynlleth, a young woman murdered in Gwynedd, a family of 3 victims of arson in Preststyn, a maniac mowing down pedestrians on the streets of Cardiff - and all in a short space of time.
A couple of weeks back, I was also wondering what on earth was happening in Dundee, where similar tragedies were being visited on families. Before that the north-east of Scotland experienced a series of horrifying deaths in car accidents, many involving young people. And, of course, Glasgow always has more than its fair share of mayhem.
And yet, I have to point out that we live in a very safe country: crime in the UK has been declining for years. In Scotland, violent crime has decreased by 55% over the past 10 years. In addition, random violence is rare: most violent crimes are committed by people known to the victim and most murderers are caught and jailed.
So why do we have the impression that violence is rife, that murderers are 'getting away with it', that we live in a lawless society?
It's partly because crime sells newspapers, so the press are always going to feature crime on their front pages. The TV news services likewise use lurid online headlines to get us to watch their bulletins. But it's also because the police (and to a lesser extent, the fire services) make sure their press officers feed the media with information. If there's anything sinister here, it's that it's in the interests of the emergency services to play up the level of serious and violent crime: it's a way of making sure the public resist cuts to the emergency services, especially frontline policing.
Cynically, I would say that scares about knife crime (which is down), random murders (down), the abduction and murder of children by strangers (almost non-existent) - all of these distract us from the less life-threatening but much scarier crimes committed around and against ordinary people: vandalism, drugs, gang activity and property theft of all kinds. These anti-social crimes affect more of us than violent crime. Why don't they appear more often in the media? Could it be because they're so much harder to deal with?
And just in passing, I have to point out that roughly one elderly person a week goes missing in Scotland, usually to be found dead later, often dementia sufferers who have wandered off. Can you imagine the hue and cry if this happened with children? Some victims just don't attract attention.....
A couple of weeks back, I was also wondering what on earth was happening in Dundee, where similar tragedies were being visited on families. Before that the north-east of Scotland experienced a series of horrifying deaths in car accidents, many involving young people. And, of course, Glasgow always has more than its fair share of mayhem.
And yet, I have to point out that we live in a very safe country: crime in the UK has been declining for years. In Scotland, violent crime has decreased by 55% over the past 10 years. In addition, random violence is rare: most violent crimes are committed by people known to the victim and most murderers are caught and jailed.
So why do we have the impression that violence is rife, that murderers are 'getting away with it', that we live in a lawless society?
It's partly because crime sells newspapers, so the press are always going to feature crime on their front pages. The TV news services likewise use lurid online headlines to get us to watch their bulletins. But it's also because the police (and to a lesser extent, the fire services) make sure their press officers feed the media with information. If there's anything sinister here, it's that it's in the interests of the emergency services to play up the level of serious and violent crime: it's a way of making sure the public resist cuts to the emergency services, especially frontline policing.
Cynically, I would say that scares about knife crime (which is down), random murders (down), the abduction and murder of children by strangers (almost non-existent) - all of these distract us from the less life-threatening but much scarier crimes committed around and against ordinary people: vandalism, drugs, gang activity and property theft of all kinds. These anti-social crimes affect more of us than violent crime. Why don't they appear more often in the media? Could it be because they're so much harder to deal with?
And just in passing, I have to point out that roughly one elderly person a week goes missing in Scotland, usually to be found dead later, often dementia sufferers who have wandered off. Can you imagine the hue and cry if this happened with children? Some victims just don't attract attention.....
Thursday 18 October 2012
Wednesday 17 October 2012
Why? Why? Why?
There are many mysteries in life:
Why can't I find the Mod results on the BBC website?
Why is Bing the worst search engine ever created?
Why is my house invaded in October by giant spiders I never see at any other time?
Why are Virgin's excellent techies served by the worst phone system ever?
Why do people buy new sets of Xmas tree decorations every year? (O yes, they do!)
Why do people who can't spell insist on writing l-o-n-g posts on Facebook?
I don't expect to get answers to any of the questions above but I would love an answer to the next one:
Why are the two top stories on BBC Scotland News tonight fkn football and not unemployment or the independence referendum?????
Why can't I find the Mod results on the BBC website?
Why is Bing the worst search engine ever created?
Why is my house invaded in October by giant spiders I never see at any other time?
Why are Virgin's excellent techies served by the worst phone system ever?
Why do people buy new sets of Xmas tree decorations every year? (O yes, they do!)
Why do people who can't spell insist on writing l-o-n-g posts on Facebook?
I don't expect to get answers to any of the questions above but I would love an answer to the next one:
Why are the two top stories on BBC Scotland News tonight fkn football and not unemployment or the independence referendum?????
Sunday 14 October 2012
Scotland's new police chief.....
.....o dear. Can anyone persuade Stephen House to stop dressing up like something out of Kommando Komics and wear something better suited (sorry) to the head of one of Europe's biggest police forces?
The profiles I've read of the man are not particularly flattering. Known as Action Man. A management wonk brought in from the Met. Likes reports. And more reports. Has already suggested HALF the civilian employees will be made redundant and many police stations will be closed once the single police force is set up - and that's before he's even got his feet under the desk.
Does not inspire confidence. Is community policing safe in his hands?
Watch this space.
The profiles I've read of the man are not particularly flattering. Known as Action Man. A management wonk brought in from the Met. Likes reports. And more reports. Has already suggested HALF the civilian employees will be made redundant and many police stations will be closed once the single police force is set up - and that's before he's even got his feet under the desk.
Does not inspire confidence. Is community policing safe in his hands?
Watch this space.
Welcome to Toryshire
What would drive a perfectly reasonable member of the Labour Party - that's me, by the way, in case you don't recognise the description - to vote for independence for Scotland? Why, the Tories, of course! Or, more exactly, the obsession of the right wing of the Tory party with backing off from European laws and possibly leaving the EU altogether.
Did I not hear Cameron at his party conference telling us we are 'Better Together'? Obviously that only applies to the UK Union, not the European Union.
Somebody tell me Cameron will grow a backbone and snuff this mad idea out once and for all.
Somebody reassure me the Lib Dems won't allow it to happen.
Did I not hear Cameron at his party conference telling us we are 'Better Together'? Obviously that only applies to the UK Union, not the European Union.
Somebody tell me Cameron will grow a backbone and snuff this mad idea out once and for all.
Somebody reassure me the Lib Dems won't allow it to happen.
Tuesday 9 October 2012
Prof, leave the kids alone!
I was planning on having an early night tonight after a busy day out today and another to come tomorrow, but then I found myself reading about some new research that suggests children are spending too much time in front of 'screens': tv screens, computer screens, games screens. Somebody mentioned 5 different screens but I've run out of ideas at 3. That may suggest how much 'screens' are part of my life - and probably yours.
Some professor of something or other has got money for research to prove looking at screens is a BAD THING. He apparently wants to stop parents parking their weans in front of screens in the UK.
Just a few points:
* Who says parents are parking their weans in front of screens? I would guess that parents watch things on these screens WITH their kids so there's interaction going on all the time. Show me the evidence that's not the case.
* Supposing the prof is right and parents are parking the weans in front of a screen, show me the evidence this is a bad thing.
* Who says reading a book - a real book - is better for you than reading off a Kindle/tablet screen? I do both. Does that make me a bad person or a good person or 50/50?
* The prof looks to be about 50. He is definitely not a digital native, as most kids now are. Is he suspicious of IT because he's had to learn all about it? While kids just grow up with IT these days, adapt to it and adapt it to do what they want. Kids are much more adaptable than we think: I'm reminded of a Skype call to Chile which all us adults thought was wonderful but during which 7 year old Tito announced he was fed up with all this yakking and was going out to play footie.
* How much time in front of screens is too much? Prove it.
* If this is really part of the 'let's beat obesity' campaign, can we just say so instead of trying to scare parents who really just want to do what's best for their kids?
* If you pass a law restricting the length of time kids can spend using IT, how on earth are you going to police it?
Some professor of something or other has got money for research to prove looking at screens is a BAD THING. He apparently wants to stop parents parking their weans in front of screens in the UK.
Just a few points:
* Who says parents are parking their weans in front of screens? I would guess that parents watch things on these screens WITH their kids so there's interaction going on all the time. Show me the evidence that's not the case.
* Supposing the prof is right and parents are parking the weans in front of a screen, show me the evidence this is a bad thing.
* Who says reading a book - a real book - is better for you than reading off a Kindle/tablet screen? I do both. Does that make me a bad person or a good person or 50/50?
* The prof looks to be about 50. He is definitely not a digital native, as most kids now are. Is he suspicious of IT because he's had to learn all about it? While kids just grow up with IT these days, adapt to it and adapt it to do what they want. Kids are much more adaptable than we think: I'm reminded of a Skype call to Chile which all us adults thought was wonderful but during which 7 year old Tito announced he was fed up with all this yakking and was going out to play footie.
* How much time in front of screens is too much? Prove it.
* If this is really part of the 'let's beat obesity' campaign, can we just say so instead of trying to scare parents who really just want to do what's best for their kids?
* If you pass a law restricting the length of time kids can spend using IT, how on earth are you going to police it?
Monday 8 October 2012
Autumn in Newlands Park
I was right in the middle of a rant about the Tories and their demonisation of benefits claimants, when I realised the sun had disappeared. I'd been planning to go to one of our local parks where I'd noticed a lot of plants and trees with their autumn foliage last week - when I didn't have my camera, of course. So off I went. By the time I got back I'd decided the Tories could go to hell in a handcart for me. Nothing anyone says will change these people.
So here are a few photos of Newlands Park in autumn. Enjoy. By the way, I haven't 'Photoshopped' or cropped the flower photos at all: the colours are so genuine, they don't need to be doctored. Which is more than can be said about the Tories.
So here are a few photos of Newlands Park in autumn. Enjoy. By the way, I haven't 'Photoshopped' or cropped the flower photos at all: the colours are so genuine, they don't need to be doctored. Which is more than can be said about the Tories.
Virginia Creeper on a house near the park
Japanese Acer
Looking towards the pond
The last blooms of autumn
Love the way this rose just seems to float in the air
Sunday 7 October 2012
It's Asda for me!
There's no pleasure in clothes shopping if you're fat. Fat people can only expect to buy clothes in styles and colours nobody in their right mind would wear, usually badly made from synthetic materials, badly finished - and if you find something half decent it'll be two or three times the price everybody else has to pay.
Elvi were pricy but good quality and their shop at Newton Mearns shut long ago. Debenhams don't do large sizes. M&S say they do but they lie. New Look at Silverburn do but only cheap n cheerful clothes you know will be done within a few months. M&Co do too but they only sell dead posh stuff by some Danish designer whose tops retail at £32 quid each. Tesco only have Xmas party clothes.
My poor sister for weeks has had to listen to me saying: Honestly, would YOU wear that?!
Then on Saturday the saintly sister suggested we go to Asda in Govan. I walked into the changing room with 7 tops and went to the check-out with 4. I had a choice of styles and colours - and I wasn't paying any more than the rest of the human race. The Asda staff were friendly and helpful and I paid a total of £35. I came home feeling like prehistoric man dragging a wooly mammoth back to the cave. I will go again.In fact, I might even go online and order more stuff to be picked up in-store.
This is for 'Medea' at the Citz with nephew Al on Friday. Can't show you the 4th top - I'm wearing it!
Elvi were pricy but good quality and their shop at Newton Mearns shut long ago. Debenhams don't do large sizes. M&S say they do but they lie. New Look at Silverburn do but only cheap n cheerful clothes you know will be done within a few months. M&Co do too but they only sell dead posh stuff by some Danish designer whose tops retail at £32 quid each. Tesco only have Xmas party clothes.
My poor sister for weeks has had to listen to me saying: Honestly, would YOU wear that?!
Then on Saturday the saintly sister suggested we go to Asda in Govan. I walked into the changing room with 7 tops and went to the check-out with 4. I had a choice of styles and colours - and I wasn't paying any more than the rest of the human race. The Asda staff were friendly and helpful and I paid a total of £35. I came home feeling like prehistoric man dragging a wooly mammoth back to the cave. I will go again.In fact, I might even go online and order more stuff to be picked up in-store.
This is for our trip to the Falkirk Wheel on Tuesday.
This is for lunch with Diane (from Colonsay) in town on Wednesday at the Bistro Beaumartin.
Sometimes it's hard to be a woman!
Jeremy (rhyming slang) Hunt has struck again. Hardly is the ink dry on his new contract as Health Secretary than he's declaring that the abortion limit should be reduced from 24 to 12 weeks. Not that this is government policy - yet. In fact, the Prime Minister was quick to say it isn't. But it's alarming that the idea is being floated in the week that the Tory party conference is due to take place. Guess what delegates are going to be talking about over their G&Ts? Even if Hunt isn't floating the idea on behalf of the party, how can anyone have faith in a minister whose first act in the job is not to sort out the mess that is the NHS down south but to push a personal view - not backed up by anything as dull as scientific fact - on this issue in a way that is bound to alarm many women? A lot of them with the vote, I might add, and prepared to use it.
I'm lucky in that I've never had to make the choice whether or not to have an abortion. And I use the word lucky deliberately. A friend of mine, mother of two now grown-up children, once put it simply: You're either on the pill or you're pregnant - and even on the pill you're not 100% protected. This is a complicated subject, not - to me - a simple matter of right or wrong. There's a personal story behind every abortion. I've heard it suggested that many young women use abortion as their preferred method of contraception. That is downright insulting.
Since conception, contraception and abortion are issues personal to each individual woman, what business is it of Hunt's what limit is put on abortion? This may be a crude explanation but here goes: (anti-)abortion and (anti-)contraception play well with certain types of voters in the USA. There's a presidential election coming up over there. I've already been told by an American friend that she'll be voting for Romney because she could never vote for a candidate who 'favours abortion.' She and her politics are straight from the Bible Belt. She's sure there are many people like her in the USA. The Tory party loves most things coming out of the USA - deregulation of business, lower taxes for the rich, reducing the power of the state - and I suspect that using (anti-)abortion as a vote-winner is another import from a society that is radically different from that of the UK. I live in hope that UK society is less likely to get excited about single-issue politics.
This issue is ultimately about women's health and politicians like Hunt need to stop chucking it around like a political football.
I'm lucky in that I've never had to make the choice whether or not to have an abortion. And I use the word lucky deliberately. A friend of mine, mother of two now grown-up children, once put it simply: You're either on the pill or you're pregnant - and even on the pill you're not 100% protected. This is a complicated subject, not - to me - a simple matter of right or wrong. There's a personal story behind every abortion. I've heard it suggested that many young women use abortion as their preferred method of contraception. That is downright insulting.
Since conception, contraception and abortion are issues personal to each individual woman, what business is it of Hunt's what limit is put on abortion? This may be a crude explanation but here goes: (anti-)abortion and (anti-)contraception play well with certain types of voters in the USA. There's a presidential election coming up over there. I've already been told by an American friend that she'll be voting for Romney because she could never vote for a candidate who 'favours abortion.' She and her politics are straight from the Bible Belt. She's sure there are many people like her in the USA. The Tory party loves most things coming out of the USA - deregulation of business, lower taxes for the rich, reducing the power of the state - and I suspect that using (anti-)abortion as a vote-winner is another import from a society that is radically different from that of the UK. I live in hope that UK society is less likely to get excited about single-issue politics.
This issue is ultimately about women's health and politicians like Hunt need to stop chucking it around like a political football.
Wednesday 3 October 2012
Bye bye to the 60s!
I've always thought the hype connected to the 60s was just that. Maybe in London there was liberation, sexual freedom in a 'swinging' society. Funny how that word has been hijacked and now means something - to me - morally distasteful.
Up here in Scotland in the 60s, we still lived in a society that forced young couples to get married because the girl got pregnant. Even in the late 70s, I can remember a friend going to see the doctor where she asked to go on the contraceptive pill. He refused her request, telling her to come back with her mother. She was 23 and a teacher. Not much liberation there.
For me, the 60s mean just two things: song lyrics - give me the opening bars of any song of the time and I can sing the rest, word-perfect. Oh, and tights! Yes, tights! The great liberators. Us gals were so glad when tights arrived. An end to layers of uncomfortable underwear digging into you. Not to mention that there would never have been mini skirts if there hadn't been tights. But most of the 60s I was too young to know what sexual liberation was or too busy swotting for exams - Highers and then university - or working to pay my way in life.
So I'm glad to see the 60s being re-assessed. We can finally say that the swinging 60s - in the London music scene at least - were really about dirty old men putting their hands up wee girls' skirts. Like Gary Glitter and Jimmy Saville. Or interfering with wee boys, like Jonathan King. Not to mention the singers and musicians whose idea of fun was having sex with groupies - or 'bitches' as they liked to call them. Not much liberation there either for the women involved.
I'm glad we've moved on in cultural terms. Divorce is good: too many people in Scotland spent a lifetime in miserable marriages in the past. Let them get on with it. As for relationships - do your thing. Hetero, gay, bi, trans? Don't care - just don't do it in the street and frighten the horses. I'm old and old-fashioned enough to wish young people would do things in some sort of order: relationship, engagement, marriage, then weans but hey, I'm also enough of a child of the 60s to think: Well, it's their life. Let them get on with that too. I could wish that young women took feminism more seriously: as far as I can see, a woman's life in Scotland is still pretty hard and I would like them to have more of a say in the way government money is spent - like on childcare, early years education and access to college and university for mothers with children. But they'll only get that once they're in political power and I see no enthusiasm for politics among young women right now.
As for Jimmy Saville, with luck there's a seat by the bad fire ready and waiting for him.
Up here in Scotland in the 60s, we still lived in a society that forced young couples to get married because the girl got pregnant. Even in the late 70s, I can remember a friend going to see the doctor where she asked to go on the contraceptive pill. He refused her request, telling her to come back with her mother. She was 23 and a teacher. Not much liberation there.
For me, the 60s mean just two things: song lyrics - give me the opening bars of any song of the time and I can sing the rest, word-perfect. Oh, and tights! Yes, tights! The great liberators. Us gals were so glad when tights arrived. An end to layers of uncomfortable underwear digging into you. Not to mention that there would never have been mini skirts if there hadn't been tights. But most of the 60s I was too young to know what sexual liberation was or too busy swotting for exams - Highers and then university - or working to pay my way in life.
So I'm glad to see the 60s being re-assessed. We can finally say that the swinging 60s - in the London music scene at least - were really about dirty old men putting their hands up wee girls' skirts. Like Gary Glitter and Jimmy Saville. Or interfering with wee boys, like Jonathan King. Not to mention the singers and musicians whose idea of fun was having sex with groupies - or 'bitches' as they liked to call them. Not much liberation there either for the women involved.
I'm glad we've moved on in cultural terms. Divorce is good: too many people in Scotland spent a lifetime in miserable marriages in the past. Let them get on with it. As for relationships - do your thing. Hetero, gay, bi, trans? Don't care - just don't do it in the street and frighten the horses. I'm old and old-fashioned enough to wish young people would do things in some sort of order: relationship, engagement, marriage, then weans but hey, I'm also enough of a child of the 60s to think: Well, it's their life. Let them get on with that too. I could wish that young women took feminism more seriously: as far as I can see, a woman's life in Scotland is still pretty hard and I would like them to have more of a say in the way government money is spent - like on childcare, early years education and access to college and university for mothers with children. But they'll only get that once they're in political power and I see no enthusiasm for politics among young women right now.
As for Jimmy Saville, with luck there's a seat by the bad fire ready and waiting for him.
Monday 1 October 2012
The Future is not so bright...
I read an article in a newspaper on Friday that claimed to sympathise with people in their 50s who now have to look after two generations: their kids and their elderly rellies. In fact, my sums make it three generations, since 50 somethings have to look after themselves as well.
As of today the Coalition is taking money off 50 somethings to put towards a pension for their old age.
Let's do a quick sum: if you're in your 30s, you have to get a job, find a place to live, set up a family and then plan for your kids' education, so you need to start saving now to pay their uni fees. But you may still be paying off your own student loans from your 20s. In that case, tough: try living, saving and paying back all at the same time. You may also have bought a house at the top of the market so you're in negative equity now and have no cash from your 'property' and can't afford to move from there for a while yet. But your mortgage marches on!
As you approach your 40s, you may have no student loans of your own to pay off but children are dear little things so you'll still have very little disposable cash. What you have goes on keeping your home up to scratch: new windows, heating, bathroom, kitchen, roof, ... Luckily, your parents are still hale and hearty.
And then, you enter your 50s and the elderly rellies enter their 70s, and you suddenly discover that now your parents need care. Their carer is likely to be you. Your kids will have finished their education but they're not earning enough to live on and so still depend on you. Even if they leave home, the chances are they'll be back.
Good luck, folks.....
As of today the Coalition is taking money off 50 somethings to put towards a pension for their old age.
Let's do a quick sum: if you're in your 30s, you have to get a job, find a place to live, set up a family and then plan for your kids' education, so you need to start saving now to pay their uni fees. But you may still be paying off your own student loans from your 20s. In that case, tough: try living, saving and paying back all at the same time. You may also have bought a house at the top of the market so you're in negative equity now and have no cash from your 'property' and can't afford to move from there for a while yet. But your mortgage marches on!
As you approach your 40s, you may have no student loans of your own to pay off but children are dear little things so you'll still have very little disposable cash. What you have goes on keeping your home up to scratch: new windows, heating, bathroom, kitchen, roof, ... Luckily, your parents are still hale and hearty.
And then, you enter your 50s and the elderly rellies enter their 70s, and you suddenly discover that now your parents need care. Their carer is likely to be you. Your kids will have finished their education but they're not earning enough to live on and so still depend on you. Even if they leave home, the chances are they'll be back.
Good luck, folks.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)