EU vote - my two cents

Last night MPs voted on trying to bring forward an in/out referendum for the UK's EU membership however

they lost 270-130 as Labour and the LibDems voted against.

Already the tribal party politics has begun.

Even during yesterday's (D)PMQs, Conservative backbenchers tried to label Mr Clegg a hypocrite for pledging for a referendum in 2008 and 2010. On every turn he repeated the party line - which is clear in the 2010 manifesto - Like Nick I've read it, though not wrote any;

The Liberal Democrats will push for a referendum if there is any significant treaty changes that will effect the UK (Not a direct quote)

This seems fairly inevitable as the crisis in the Eurozone continues and even Germany feels the pinch.

Indeed the 2008 leaflet calling for a referendum was when Gordon Brown threw powers away in the Lisbon treaty. Since then we've stuck to the position of referendum when next there is a treaty change.

Europe has always been rightly or wrongly an obsession for elements of the Conservative party and I remember it being a severe problem for John Major's administration and helping to bring it down.

Now it looks like the party is rupturing again. The small number of hardcore MPs is growing but why?

It could be put down to a couple of reasons.

1. The rise of UKIP, especially after the last round of local elections, Conservatives are worrying about their supporters. Further to that the best way to take the wind out of their sails is to hold a referendum.

2. Sort of linked to the last point is the right wing worried that the Conservative party have drifted too centrist and given too many concessions to the Liberal Democrats. Where as support is leeching to UKIP there are those members who are loyal to the Conservative party and want to bring their party back.

David Cameron denies it being a serious problem from the other side of the Atlantic.

Labour are already attacking the Tories for having their priorities straight. Tackling issues that effect everyone like taxation, living standards, fuel prices to name but a few. I tend to agree - as do the Liberal Democrats which is why we are waiting for the "Inevitable" treaty change.

This Conservative obsession could, as it has in the past, cause a detrimental distraction at a vital moment.

I should just say that I am pro referendum on Europe but Pro Europe - much to the horror of some of my family!

Medway's Rubbish

Like many of my Wednesday's off I have spent the morning clearing out my front garden. Wednesday is rubbish day in my part of the Medway towns so it makes sense to get rid of all the rubbish in one foul swoop.

The thing I don't understand is why there is so much rubbish in my front garden - well that was until I started paying more attention.

You see I live opposite two take aways, a post office and a Tesco metro and as I watch people come out of the various outlets I see people drop receipts, jettison empty fag boxes, pull off cellophane wrappers and let them free to the wind.

I also on a main route to various different schools including Woodlands, Robert Napier, Barnsole and for some - Brompton academy and at certain times of the day I see streams of school kids going in either direction jettisoning their unwanted refuse which some how gravitates to my garden. Probably because I don't have a wall and an open driveway.

Then of course there is rubbish day itself. Not everyone ties up their bags well and on windy days
like today well...

This was a snap of my road today.

So who is to blame?

Well, during the local elections in 2011 the Independents claimed that the Libdem councillors of Gillingham South hadn't provided enough bins - which was proved to be hokum. Further to that the presence of the Council bins around Gillingham doesn't mean that people will use them. There is a bin right outside the Sturdee Avenue Tesco - is it used?

Well, is it Medway Council? Every morning I see the street cleaning team doing a Herculean job of cleaning rubbish from the streets in my area. The problem is, no sooner have they done it than people reappear and drop more litter. I will gripe about the bin bag situation though. A few years ago Medway Council stopped providing residents with rubbish bags - fair enough, I can understand the cut and applaud it as a good money saving scheme. The only problem was that the bags the Council provided were thick and large so if tied up properly they stayed so and were difficult to tear. Now that we have to get our own many people get economy or cheap bin bags because why spend a lot on something that is essentially rubbish?

It is some what of a false economy as they soon rip or need double bagging. If they rip outside though isn't that some other persons problem?

Yeah - mine!

I have to clean up refuse from my front garden and see it blowing up the street.

We all live in the Medway towns, it is not the job of the Council to run around clearing up your rubbish all day every day. Make sure your rubbish isn't just going to tear open, put your litter in the bin, take a moment just to tidy up after yourself and maybe things wouldn't look so untidy.

Lodgehill development will be devestating for Nightingales

I have always been a Country boy. Despite being born in Medway I grew up in Marden on the cusp of the Weald. During my A'levels I specialised in biology (mainly ecology and Marine biology) and have always had a love of wide open green spaces and nature as a whole.

I'm also a realist though and understand that the human race needs to strike a balance with nature. New housing has to be built for families and for the economy. I also realise that there is limited space for this in the Medway towns which is why the council are particularly miffed by the whole SSSI declaration on Lodge hill.

But you know what? The council are wrong.

Lodge Hill's SSSI was established because 80 mating pairs of Nightingales nest there. Not just one or two or a percentage of Kentish Nightingales but a significant number of a species that is becoming endangered.

If the Medway Conservative council and Rochester & Strood MP Mark Reckless are successful in their campaign to over turn the Environment agency's ruling there will be a catastrophic impact on the Nightingale population which may never recover.

Ecology and Ecospheres are exceptionally fragile things. Slight fluctuations on temperature, climate or availability of any number of inputs can have knock on impacts for centuries. Two escaped rabbits in Australia caused havoc for a century with the local ecosphere and had to be controlled with myxomatosis. Over fishing of tuna has made a massive dent in the Pelagic shark populations. Removing a vital habitat from an indigenous bird population could push them to the verge of extinction in the UK. The Nightingale's requirements for nesting areas are specific, they aren't like other birds who are less picky, and if an area doesn't match their requirements they simply won't nest there. Further to this with a reoccurring nest site they know it is there, if it is destroyed they have to find a new location which could put back the breeding season and ultimately it could mean no eggs this year.

I find it somewhat nonsensical that on the one hand Cllr Chambers et al are arguing that Boris Island or the Cliffe proposals will damage or irradiate marshland which is an SSI and national heritage site but at the same time willing to wipe out the Nightingales' habitat.

Our nations ecology has been hit quite hard over recent years by destruction of green spaces and the changes in the weather and we as a nation need to take steps now before species like the Nightingale are gone from these shores forever.
Trish Marchant of the Medway Green party is encouraging people who feel the same to write to Natural England (at kent Land management team, Natural England, International house, Dover place, Ashford, Kent TN23 1HU) to voice their support for the SSSI. I join her calls on this and will be speaking to our local party to drum up support.

This is a green and pleasent land but Councils up and down the country are happy to risk serious ecological disaster. As a good friend of mine said when I told her of the Lodge Hill development (quoting Richard Adams);

Man will not rest until they have destroyed this world.

Nick Clegg on the Queen's speech

Dear Chris,

Fair pensions. Decent care in your old age. A tax cut for small businesses taking on staff. A major new high speed railway. Energy investment to keep lights on and bills affordable. Shared parental leave. Rehabilitation of prisoners to set them back on the straight and narrow.

Just a few highlights from the Government’s plans for legislation this year, outlined this Wednesday in the Queen’s Speech, designed to build a stronger economy and a fairer society in Britain, enabling everyone to get on in life.

The state opening of Parliament is an eccentric highlight of the year in politics. Pomp and pageantry are not really my thing, but I’ll confess to a certain affection for the whole rigmarole: you have probably seen the marching up and down and slamming of doors in people's faces on TV. One thing you might not know is that we had to work to a very strict deadline to finalise Her Majesty's words. That's because the speech has to be written out on goatskin and it takes a few days to dry.

Plus of course, it’s rather fun to see my usually austere colleagues Alistair Carmichael and Dick Newby dressed up in robes looking like refugees from Hogwarts or a Gilbert and Sullivan production. One thing’s for sure: I’m relieved there aren’t any Deputy Prime Minister robes to wear.

What matters most is the substance of course. We made sure all the big measures needed to grow the economy, create jobs, and improve people’s quality of life were included. But we also made sure some things - plans for a Snooper's Charter tracking everyone's emails and social networking - were kept out.

It won't have escaped your attention that the mood has changed in the Conservative Party after the local elections, and that changes the rhetoric we’re hearing from them - about equal marriage, development aid, and most of all Europe. The lesson for us is clear and simple: it is more important than ever that we stick to our path. Our job is to anchor the Government in the centre ground, stopping others from lurching this way and that and making sure the Government delivers our core objectives: a stronger economy in a fairer society.

That's why major liberal reforms and investment – from childcare to pensions – will remain the core business of this Government. Not endless navel-gazing about when and how a referendum may take place in years to come in circumstances we can't predict. We Liberal Democrats must remain focused on the things people really care about, whatever other parties may say.

Please could you forward this message on to a family member or friend who might be interested?

Nick

PS I hope you noticed the Queen mention the drive for a “stronger economy and a fairer society” in the very first line of her speech. I knew our message was starting to hit home!

Girl's got game: Lucy Collette and Game reviews

I travel a lot by train and at Stupid O'clock in the morning. Sometimes a book is my only companion, most times I nap and other times I scroll through the day before's Tweets and conversations, which is what I did today, and I stumbled on an argument between some Tweeters and Lucy "Vixen" Collette the glamour model and Game reviewer for Nuts magazine.

It did get fairly personal in its nature, which was very uncalled for, but the original question was a valid one;

Does she actually play a lot of games or is she just the sexy figure head with a team of ghost writers?

Lucy claims that she does and what cause is their to disbelieve her?

Well, it is difficult, for some people, to believe that:-

a) A glamour model would be into gaming - after all surely it is the domain of geeks and kids?

b) The self same model wouldn't be able to formulate a review of a game without help.

This is pigeon holing and playing to stereotype. After all gaming is an open recreational pastime and although teenagers and students do predominantly control the market due to having more free time and money, there are also those who enjoy Call of Duty and Fifa games who are not in this bracket.

Gaming is also not gender specific, though mainly (from my experiences) a male pastime. However there are "Gamer girls" and more than you would expect. There are famous examples such as Ann Hathaway, Team Unicorn and Claire Grant. Again, from my own experiences I have met and know  some fantastic "Gamer girls" and even my wife has learnt to play and can use a Sniper rifle as well as anyone if not better. She has even surprised my mates (who presumed as a girl she was there to make up numbers and wouldn't be very good) with her savage tenacity and deadly aim!

I can understand the accusation that she is merely the face of the Games reviews as Nuts Magazine's demographic is teens and early 20s men and Lucy doing the reviews would attract more attention than say...me.

Let's be honest if you were in this demographic and wanted a games reviewer who would you want?

A redhead with cleavage and a Skyrim addiction or Miss Collette?

The other thing to bear in mind is that a Games review is a games review and ultimately if you want to read the review would it matter if the review was done by Lucy or by a nameless writer? Her presence definitely "Sexes up" the games section but it isn't a necessity.

Lucy does tweet about gaming - mostly Simpsons online, but there are others including an endearing picture of her beloved pet "Pookie" on one of her Controllers. People have based their judgements on the overall lack of tweets compared to other Glamour related posts.

Well that isn't a great basis, I was/am an avid gamer. My history of gaming stretches back to my teens (and an Amstrad 1512 CGA pc!!!) with addictions to games like Their finest hour, X-wing vs. TIE fighter, A-train, Dune II, GTA III, GTA San Andreas, Star Wars Battlefront (I & II), Force Unleashed (I & II) Fable III and recently Skyrim (blogged here and here) to name but a few.

If you read my twitter feed you will find very little about any of this except on the very rare occasion. Most of my boring stream is about Liberal Democrats, Medway Politics, Trains, my Kids and randomness.

If I started writing Games reviews would I be accused of having a ghost writer? It seems that the basis for the accusation is purely on the fact she is a Glamour model. The same could be said for complaints that she is aiding the objectification of women by writing the column. Forget for a moment that she also poses semi-naked elsewhere in the magazine, take her as the young, attractive woman (with a positive body image) who is breaking the mold of adolescent male Games reviewers and therefore a role model for "Girl gamers" by showing the world that women do game and they are as good if not better than many guys give them credit for and actually know what they're talking about. Gaming isn't about gender or background it is about your achievements and abilities in what ever genre of game you are playing - be it platform, strategy, sports, simulation or RPG. I was once outnumbered 15 to one by enemy fighters and still fought them all off and landed back on the air field with only minor damage to the 109. My wife made a head shot from across the Siberia map on Time Splitters future perfect, these small feats are to be celebrated why fixate on the gender or the background of the player?

I don't believe there is evidence to support the claim that she doesn't write the column or that she isn't a gamer and I think until given solid reason you should give her the benefit of the doubt - I believe Lucy is a gamer, I have also enjoyed her column so what's the big deal?

It is a sad commentary on today's culture and society that we immediately judge an attractive woman by her occupation and disbelieve that she is capable and must have ghost writers.

Child care must be affordable and for the kids

This morning it is hitting the news that Nick Clegg is opposing or Not convinced by the Government's

proposals to adjust the ratios of Children to staff in nurseries across the country.

The ratio will be increased to 1:4 (from 1:3) for babies and up to 1:6 for two year olds.

There are some concerns that your child will not necessarily get the attention they may need. Two year olds are exceptionally boisterous and into everything - which I am finding out for myself - and I have trouble keeping up with one let alone six! The level of quality can be much depleted.

Through in a child like mine, who has a certain amount of special needs and you are losing even more time. Due to Sophie's condition she does require phsyio and attention for her leg splints and boots. Her walking and running can be very dicey and if there is a fire alarm she needs to be carried out - this can take up a lot of time for a member of staff and we're more than fortunate that her nursery has some really good staff. However in a room where the girl has another five other children in need of attention things will become stretched.

I'm aware that the Ministers announced that the increased ratio is similar to Germany and less than France but let us not be hasty and rush into this - let us listen to parents and staff alike and progress at a reasonable rate and get this right. You cannot make rushed mistakes with Children's futures or education.

Children respond best with stimulation and as much contact as possible, by raising the ratio you are taking some of that time away from them.

Nick was quoted in the Guardian as saying;

It is not a great ideological thing, it is about getting it right for parents up and down the country. When the last government changed the so-called ratios for three- and four-year-olds, it had almost no effect in reducing the costs for parents whatsoever, so you do need to be led by the evidence and that is what I will continue to be in the debate

I would challenge you to spend a morning look after six two-year-olds

As I said recently, the Cuts are now going to impact my family in Gillingham with the rising of nursery costs on the one hand for parents and the slim lining of Surestart centres and nurseries who are asking staff to reapply for their jobs and taking voluntary redundancy.

The ratio of staff and thus the care and attention that a child needs are being cut and we - the already stretched taxpaying parents are being asked to pay more for less.

There is also the somewhat nonsensical approach that is seeing parents priced out of putting their young ones into day care so that they can go to work as the second income is barley covering the costs - it becomes more cost efficient for one parent to give up work completely and stay with the kids at home!

There are some serious (LibDem) boons that are helping working families like mine, the cut in Income tax means that my wife's income is now completely tax free, the free nursery placements for three year olds will help during term time too but until then we're quite stuck and so are many other families.
Many of the mothers that my wife knows through Sophie's friends have all expressed concern about the rising prices and are not in a position to pay it. My Sister's sister in law found that she had to give up work to look after her young children and my sister is looking at the same scenario.

David Cameron ran under the banner of making things fairer for families and working people and yet these reforms are getting kicked in the wallets and our children are being made to suffer in these reforms. Having a family, even the average of 2.4 kids, is now a hinderance and it feels like we're being persecuted for having kids. Child care has to be affordable for all so that children can go into daycare and both parents can work to pay for all the other rising prices in utilities, food and transport costs.

Let's take a moment. Look at the situation, talk to parents and staff then reevaluate the situation

John's retirement

Medway has known many disasters.

The Gillingham bus station firestorm of 1940.

The explosion of HMS Bulwark.

Mark Stinson's reign as manager of the Gills...

However, the Medway political scene has suffered a great loss. John Ward has retired from political

blogging and tweeting.

When I first started out almost three years ago the lines were very clear of blue, red and gold and John was the elder statesman and former Conservative Councillor. His opinion on things as well as his vast memory and catalogue of information and stats was respected from all sides.

To be honest I understand his decision, I too have considered it a few times recently.

John's decision is a great loss to the Medway Political scene and I will miss his input as I'm sure others will too, but he's not gone completely - check his blog out for animé and other cool things.