Poly Toynbee spoilt her Guardian piece on Afghanistan on the day Douglas Alexander came to Chorlton with a call for government to buy the Afghan poppy crop to stop it falling into the hands of the drug trade; ‘never was a better reason for buying a crop than to bring Afghan farmers in from the world of crime that risks keeping the country lawless indefinitely’. And if you turn the volume right up on your PC, you’ll be able to hear the secretary of state for international development explain why that’s not a great idea.
The minister majors on the lack of legitimate demand for the poppy crop, the need to establish law and order and the better option of finding legitimate work for farmers, which is fair enough.
But there are also sound economic arguments against buying up the crop. Far from removing the incentive to crow poppies, this kind of intervention at least partially legitimises the activity, but worse offers the farmer guaranteed sales at an inflated price. Drug cartels would most likely bid up the price and so the gulf between earnings from legitimate crops and poppies would widen. Higher heroin prices wouldn’t be a bad thing and may cut consumption (there’s only so much an addict can steal) but the programme’s impact would be limited and overall production would most likely rise.
A more sensible intervention might see government guarantee the price of Afghan grains, fruits and nuts. If the price farmers received for these goods were guaranteed to exceed that of poppies, then they might be persuaded to switch. Although here we could expect the market price of poppy to rise as supply dropped off and the market price of grains, fruits and nuts to fall as supply increased. And government would take an ever larger hit as it sold off the produce at ever growing loss. And then there’d be a food surplus to dispose of responsibly. But it might just work.
Beckett may have subtitled his play a ‘tragicomedy in two acts’ and the characters occasional direct addresses to the audience are a little music hall. But nothing could have prepared us for the couple sat behind who could have been mistaken for a BBC sit-com laughter track. They came very close to getting a slap – especially when she started to make the sound of rustling leaves – and seemed to think they were at a performance on Sing-a-long-a Sound of Music or the Rocky Horror Show. Worse, people kept looking round to give Paddington Bear stares that sometimes felt directed at us.
Never mind. They failed to spoil the show, which is as good as all the reviews say it is, if not better. Waiting for Godot is a play we are all supposed to have seen, which might make it feel like an obligation, but this is a must-see production for all the right reasons.
We are, as I rather simplistically read it, observing Vladimir in purgatory; he is the only character with any memory and so any real understanding of everyone’s predicament. Everyone else enjoys an ephemeral, dreamlike existence that is always frustrating and sometimes nightmarish to Vladimir. And so, nothing really happens… except that time passes.
Nearly twenty years ago, when I was the Student Liberal Democrats international officer, I ran a national campaign on third world debt. We were well ahead of our time and were frequently dismissed as irrelevent idealists.
So Gordon Brown’s clear and genuine commitment to international development has always impressed and helped persuade me to join Labour, almost ten years on from giving up on the Lib Dems.
Debt relief remains an important issue. Some countries are still paying off loans taken out by corrupt, poorly governed regimes. In many cases lenders have been irresponsible and should pay the price for that.
But the debt debate is largely won and has been rightly overtaken by the issue of trade as debt relief, like aid, can only be a short term fix.
Anyway. Here Douglas Alexander, secretary of state for international development, explains to an audience at St Ninians Church, Chorlton-cum-Hardy what the government’s doing to make sure those Millennium Goals aren’t forgotten. More podcasts to follow. Uploaded by mobile phone to Stephen Newton’s diary of sorts
Not being superstitious my wife and I married in a civil ceremony with no regard to what any supernatural being(s) might think. We were motivated by the excuse for a party in celebration of our partnership and (to a lesser extent) the legal advantages that come with having a partnership recognised; we may have preferred a civil partnership to a marriage.
While others marry in churches, synagogues, mosques or whatever, all these unions are entered into the same register. So I can understand that someone who’s married in conformity to a particular religious tradition might seek to obtain a divorce in much the same way, with the secular authority simply informed of the outcome.
Jewish courts already rule on civil matters and successive governments have encouraged a wide range of methods for Alternative Dispute Resolution to relieve pressure on the courts. None of these things removes anybody’s right to go to court, but they do tend to offer speedier alternatives. A Jewish court presumably offers the chance to sort things out in a manner informed by the traditions of that faith and other methods of dispute resolution might be informed by other values to which all parties subscribe.
However, while Sharia courts might have a role in civil disputes, and possibly marriage and divorce, there is clearly no role for them in the criminal justice system.
These atrocities, which are systemic rather than occasional events perpetrated by the odd nutter, rightly make many of us suspicious of any mention of Sharia and of Islam generally; which is why our politicians are running away from the Archbishop of Canterbury so quickly. Only Islamic community itself can tackle such issues effectively; something it must do if it wishes to enjoy the privilege of civil Sharia courts.
I’ve never felt tempted to spice up my life, but I’m sure that not even hardened fans will take the Spice Girls ‘family commitments’ excuse for cutting short their tour very seriously. I’m sure they could have found a decent babysitter wherever they planned to go. But the worse thing about the Spice Girls is the way they patronise their fans who, ten years on, are no longer children.
They split because they didn’t get on… and they cancelled the tour because they still don’t get on.
All of which provides a great contrast with Take That, who I very much enjoyed. I’d never have gone to see them at their height, buying cheap tickets at the last minute was a spur of the moment thing. This was a spectacular show put on by friends who’d been matured by their years in the wilderness and the vibe was warm and friendly.
The Spice Girls, in contrast, will always be silly little girls.
Canadian seal hunters are hoping EU bureaucracy delays the implementation of a Europe wide ban on the import of seal products following a report last month the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that confirmed that sealers often do not comply with the Canadian regulations designed to minimise suffering. As a result many seals are skinned alive, hooked and dragged while conscious or left wounded for long periods.
Banning the import of seal product to the EU would have a significant impact on the commercial viability of the hunt and the ongoing debate in Canada.
And you can play a role in making that happen as the European Commission wants to know what you think. This public consultation is open until 13 February 2008. It only takes a moment to complete and most questions are optional; you can simply give your name and say you think seal products should be banned if you like. You might like to offer a view on an acceptable struck-and-lost ratio, that is the proportion of wounded seals you’re happy to see slink away while the hunter’s back is turned.
A flaw in the process is the apparent assumption that the rule of law will be respected by seal hunters to such an extent that they follow any regulation designed to minimise the seals’ suffering… the EU’s own food safety authority has found that simply doesn’t happen. Anything other than a ban is simply unenforceable. Photo by Mike Baird. Used with permission. Some rights reserved.
Witnessing the first symptoms of autism emerge just after a child has received an MMR vaccination is bound to raise questions in parents’ minds that have rightly been investigated; especially with constant scare stories like this Observer front page with so many problems it’s been removed from the newspaper’s archives.
Life is full of coincidences and yet coincidences are always hard to believe… to rely on them when writing fiction is a grave sin that smacks of unforgivable laziness.
People need to believe that there’s a reason their child is autistic and to apportion blame would provide some comfort, while fighting MMR provides a focus for all that understandable anger. Yet there is no reason for any reasonable person, free of all that emotion, to believe in any link between MMR and autism.
The vulnerable need to better protected from charlatans bearing false health warnings. Just as the unqualified are barred from providing legal advice, so they should also be barred from giving us medical advice. Nobody can provide evidence that homeopathy is better than a placebo but that doesn’t stop Prince Charles demanding it on the NHS. It should.
I wouldn’t say that ponsey snacks are killing the English pub, but they’re having a good go. £1.75 for something that claims to be Japanese when you really need an honest packet of salt ‘n’ vinegar to deliver that essential post workout sugar rush.
And the bar tender had no scoop, so poured as much ponsey snack on the floor as he did in my bowl. And no packet, so no customer information; Tyrell’s advise offsetting each packet of their crisps with a portion of broccoli. How do I make amends for eating the Japanese impostor?
Subscribe
