I grew up in a household devoted to Labour. In the 1970s, my father took a week off work every year so he could watch the party conference on the telly...every minute of it...all day...every day...Monday to Friday. In the evenings, if you didn't make an excuse - homework, a hot date - and leave the room, you had to sit through the edited highlights. With commentary. He would listen to the speakers and make one of two pronouncements: 'Good speaker - no doubt trained by the Communist Party' or 'Poor speaker - a TUC man.' He loved 'good' speakers like Jim Callaghan and George Brown.
These were the days before spin doctors. I remember the first time I heard Tony Blair speak at a conference. I knew at once there was something not right. His speech was slick and well put together but not from the heart. Of course, I was prejudiced: I was devoted to John Smith - I remember clearly where I was when his death was announced - and compared Blair unfavourably to him.
But all of the speakers I have heard in earlier political eras are giants of oratory compared to the politicians I hear speaking right now. Especially, but not exclusively, Tory speakers: people like Boris Johnson, Philip Hammond, Theresa May, Amber Rudd and Liam Fox. Donald Trump and, sadly, Emmanuel Macron are the same. People like Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Tim Farron and Nicola Sturgeon are streets ahead of these people. (Mind you, it would be good if Diane Abbott had a script - and stuck to it - she'd get into less bother).
Numpty speakers read from a script. And the script is written by a spin doctor with no input from the speaker. Numpty speakers can't improvise. They are unable to adapt to the mood of the audience (on the rare occasions they ever face an audience). They are utterly devoid of humour. In fact, they have serious problems with what I call empathy but what is now widely entitled 'emotional intelligence.' If the Tories knew anything about the life of real people they might just cotton on to how upset a lot of us are to hear them talking about cutting the benefits of disabled people, depriving young people of housing benefit, imposing sanctions on the poorest in society - and, lordy lordy, talking about pensioners as if we have been living off the fat of the land for years and need to have our incomes curtailed (rather than living on the 4th worst pensions in greater Europe).
I'm more and more convinced these are politicians who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. They are rich. They live at a level that a friend of mine once described: she'd had lunch with a very well off woman, wife of a farmer. They talked about the cost of housing and how hard it was for young people to get the deposit together on a house. She wondered what kind of money they were talking about: maybe £18,000, said my friend. She was far from sympathetic. It can't be that hard to get that amount of money together, she said. Whereas my friend - and I - could remember being down to our last fiver - and not as students - as teachers...
Most of all, I suspect the numpty politicians have a sense of entitlement that is abhorrent to most of us. They know what is best for us and, with a lot of backing from their friends in the media, they will make sure we get it.
The numpty speakers have the script and they expect the voters to follow it. That's why Gordon Brown got into trouble with a voter. She hadn't seen the script. Or if she had, she decided it was mince and dumped it. Theresa May might want to ponder Gordon's fate. He's still cutting about giving advice to voters in Scotland and we still go right on paying no attention. Theresa can tell us her government is strong and stable till she's blue in the face. But there's a good chance we won't buy it.
Sunday, 28 May 2017
Saturday, 27 May 2017
Who's to blame?
No parent should have to bury a child. It goes against nature.
I can't begin to imagine how it feels to get the phone call that tells you the child you dropped off at school or saw off on the bus to visit their grandparents or sent on an adventure holiday is not coming home. Sadly, I've had to be around when a few parents were dealing with this terrible news. And none of us handled it well. It's not something we're prepared for. There is, as I often say, no handbook for dealing with death. Especially violent death.
Six days into the Manchester bombing and the politics has started. Who's to blame for the deaths and terrible injuries in Manchester on Monday night? I would say the bomber himself. And maybe IS, although we don't yet know if the bomber had links to that organisation. Theresa May has placed the Manchester bombing right in the centre of her general election campaign, and disgracefully, the right wing press has decided that the person responsible is Jeremy Corbyn.
I don't really want to get into the detail of how Theresa May as Home Secretary ran down the police force or how Liam Fox and Philip Hammond ran down the army, to the point where we didn't have enough police on the streets or enough soldiers to back them up. I'm very unimpressed by the performance of MI5 and MI6. I know Corbyn's background - anti-war - and I tend to agree with him that the adventures the UK has had in the Middle East (backing up the USA) have made us a target of many rebel groups.
But then I decided to look at things from another angle. We don't hear the French, the Belgians or the Germans bitching about atrocities in their countries. That's partly because, frankly, the Brits don't give a rat's ass about anyone in Europe so we don't hear them, but it's also - in my opinion - part of the 'heroic Britain' cult the media here push. Standing up to adversity. Dealing wonderfully with the crisis. That usually involves people who are underfunded and underpaid - step forward the NHS and the emergency services - saving the UK government's ass. Ours not to question why...ours but to do or die...
I googled 'terrorist murders in France' tonight and came up with a wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_France
The article runs for page after terrible page. There have been other countries in Europe attacked by IS - the UK, Belgium and Germany especially - but France seems to have copped a lot. No wonder they have soldiers on their streets.
Is there anything we can learn from the French? A couple of things maybe:
1 Don't let people of North African or Arab descent become an isolated group. Help them to integrate, rather than letting them rot in banlieues outside major cities - or ghettos inside cities. In particular, work at educating the young people including the young women.
2 Work at inclusion: we know that young people who have no role in society - no work, no education, low expectations - whether they are black or white - will become followers of extreme groups: the EDL, neo-Nazis or IS. The current 'welfare' approach tells these young people they mean nothing, and are worth nothing. No housing support, a jobseekers' allowance based on sanctions.
Above all, we need to approach the 'problem' of the Middle East as something we can solve.
I can't begin to imagine how it feels to get the phone call that tells you the child you dropped off at school or saw off on the bus to visit their grandparents or sent on an adventure holiday is not coming home. Sadly, I've had to be around when a few parents were dealing with this terrible news. And none of us handled it well. It's not something we're prepared for. There is, as I often say, no handbook for dealing with death. Especially violent death.
Six days into the Manchester bombing and the politics has started. Who's to blame for the deaths and terrible injuries in Manchester on Monday night? I would say the bomber himself. And maybe IS, although we don't yet know if the bomber had links to that organisation. Theresa May has placed the Manchester bombing right in the centre of her general election campaign, and disgracefully, the right wing press has decided that the person responsible is Jeremy Corbyn.
I don't really want to get into the detail of how Theresa May as Home Secretary ran down the police force or how Liam Fox and Philip Hammond ran down the army, to the point where we didn't have enough police on the streets or enough soldiers to back them up. I'm very unimpressed by the performance of MI5 and MI6. I know Corbyn's background - anti-war - and I tend to agree with him that the adventures the UK has had in the Middle East (backing up the USA) have made us a target of many rebel groups.
But then I decided to look at things from another angle. We don't hear the French, the Belgians or the Germans bitching about atrocities in their countries. That's partly because, frankly, the Brits don't give a rat's ass about anyone in Europe so we don't hear them, but it's also - in my opinion - part of the 'heroic Britain' cult the media here push. Standing up to adversity. Dealing wonderfully with the crisis. That usually involves people who are underfunded and underpaid - step forward the NHS and the emergency services - saving the UK government's ass. Ours not to question why...ours but to do or die...
I googled 'terrorist murders in France' tonight and came up with a wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_France
Is there anything we can learn from the French? A couple of things maybe:
1 Don't let people of North African or Arab descent become an isolated group. Help them to integrate, rather than letting them rot in banlieues outside major cities - or ghettos inside cities. In particular, work at educating the young people including the young women.
2 Work at inclusion: we know that young people who have no role in society - no work, no education, low expectations - whether they are black or white - will become followers of extreme groups: the EDL, neo-Nazis or IS. The current 'welfare' approach tells these young people they mean nothing, and are worth nothing. No housing support, a jobseekers' allowance based on sanctions.
Above all, we need to approach the 'problem' of the Middle East as something we can solve.
Wednesday, 17 May 2017
Temper, temper!
This is me throwing my dummy out the pram, stamping my foot and threatening to thcream and thcream...I just watched a BBC4 programme about St Petersburg. It was fabulous to look at and - I think - gave a fair picture of the history of the city and the artistic life there now. I imagine the two presenters chose what to film and they seem to come from an academic or fine art background so they knew what they were doing. But can anyone tell me why they didn't make any effort to pronounce any of the Russian names they came across correctly?
I am fed up with this. Is it lack of education? British snobbery? A harking back to the Empire when foreign names didn't matter but could be reduced to a standard English (mis-)pronunciation? I can see how Deolali (the name of an Indian town with a military sanatorium and a transit camp) could be reduced to doolally and used as an insult in the 19th century. Or how Ypres became, in the mouths of largely uneducated British WW1 servicemen, Wipers. But we're talking here about apparently educated people on the telly in the 21st century. What would it take for them to learn how to pronounce place names and artists' names correctly?
It's not that difficult in Russian: once you know the rhythm of the language, the pronunciation is quite easy.
But it's not just Russian names that get the British treatment. French, Spanish, Italian, Greek - all of them are ripe for massacre in the mouths of British people. It's not the first time I've heard a Brit say 'merci beau-cup' or 'grassy-arse' - and really mean it.
It's just bloody rude is what it is.
The St Peterburg team are to visit Barcelona soon, heaven help us. What will they make of the Catalan names?
I am fed up with this. Is it lack of education? British snobbery? A harking back to the Empire when foreign names didn't matter but could be reduced to a standard English (mis-)pronunciation? I can see how Deolali (the name of an Indian town with a military sanatorium and a transit camp) could be reduced to doolally and used as an insult in the 19th century. Or how Ypres became, in the mouths of largely uneducated British WW1 servicemen, Wipers. But we're talking here about apparently educated people on the telly in the 21st century. What would it take for them to learn how to pronounce place names and artists' names correctly?
It's not that difficult in Russian: once you know the rhythm of the language, the pronunciation is quite easy.
But it's not just Russian names that get the British treatment. French, Spanish, Italian, Greek - all of them are ripe for massacre in the mouths of British people. It's not the first time I've heard a Brit say 'merci beau-cup' or 'grassy-arse' - and really mean it.
It's just bloody rude is what it is.
The St Peterburg team are to visit Barcelona soon, heaven help us. What will they make of the Catalan names?
Saturday, 13 May 2017
Tests
I'm doing a 3 week (free) online course called Digital Footprint. I'm not taking it seriously. I'm not in a good place with the CFS right now. I also don't want a certificate or to build on this wee course to go on to greater things.
To be honest, I'm watching the style of the presenters as much as listening to the content. They could do with some media prep, these people. There's a bit too much surreptitious reading of the script in front of them. Have they not learned to memorise? Or got one of those machines that scrolls the text - like the news people have on TV? (They have one at the Catalan university in Barcelona, as I saw in the last course I did). The camera angles are not always good: one interview let viewers see right up the interviewee's nose. Not an edifying sight, believe me. And sometimes the camera is just too close - a wee bit of distance when filming anyone over the age of 30 is a good idea. There's also one very distracting hairdo and a pair of dangly bright pink earrings someone should have said were a non-no.
I blagged my way through the assessment for week and I've just passed the end of week assessment for week 2 first time. There's a deadline (normally I don't do deadlines - see comment about CFS above) but you can do the assessment many times. The pass level is 60%. It's all multiple choice. You can't go on to the next week till you pass the assessment for the previous week.
Shamefully, I find myself playing the test game: I do all the questions I can and then go back: I read the question I don't know the answer to several times, read the question before and the one after in case they help (it's called 'reading round the question' in teacher-speak) and calculate the odds of each possible answer being right (is it sensible or logical or likely). Easy-peasy.
This is 'pretend' learning for me but it doesn't matter: I expect those who are using this course as a way 'in' to IT or university level learning will go for certification, in which case a lot more will be expected of them in the way of learning and assessment.
The most surprising thing I've learned so far about my digital footprint is that a teacher's book I wrote 15 years ago to accompany a TV series is still in print and for sale on Amazon.
To be honest, I'm watching the style of the presenters as much as listening to the content. They could do with some media prep, these people. There's a bit too much surreptitious reading of the script in front of them. Have they not learned to memorise? Or got one of those machines that scrolls the text - like the news people have on TV? (They have one at the Catalan university in Barcelona, as I saw in the last course I did). The camera angles are not always good: one interview let viewers see right up the interviewee's nose. Not an edifying sight, believe me. And sometimes the camera is just too close - a wee bit of distance when filming anyone over the age of 30 is a good idea. There's also one very distracting hairdo and a pair of dangly bright pink earrings someone should have said were a non-no.
I blagged my way through the assessment for week and I've just passed the end of week assessment for week 2 first time. There's a deadline (normally I don't do deadlines - see comment about CFS above) but you can do the assessment many times. The pass level is 60%. It's all multiple choice. You can't go on to the next week till you pass the assessment for the previous week.
Shamefully, I find myself playing the test game: I do all the questions I can and then go back: I read the question I don't know the answer to several times, read the question before and the one after in case they help (it's called 'reading round the question' in teacher-speak) and calculate the odds of each possible answer being right (is it sensible or logical or likely). Easy-peasy.
This is 'pretend' learning for me but it doesn't matter: I expect those who are using this course as a way 'in' to IT or university level learning will go for certification, in which case a lot more will be expected of them in the way of learning and assessment.
The most surprising thing I've learned so far about my digital footprint is that a teacher's book I wrote 15 years ago to accompany a TV series is still in print and for sale on Amazon.
Thursday, 11 May 2017
Hello, Treeza
Sorry, Hen, I just cannot take you seriously, not now that Janey Godley has re-invented you as Big Treeza Fae the Hood.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTNFdNoqYrA
I can't see your wee shoes with the diamond chips build into the heels without laughing out loud. It's like a parody of Paul Simon's Diamonds on the Soles of her Shoes. What's up with you? Have you no class at all? FFS, as if the leather trousers weren't bad enough.
I cannot see you on a street corner in Shettleston with a fag in your mouth, a can of Superlager in one hand and a poke of chips in the other.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTNFdNoqYrA
I can't see your wee shoes with the diamond chips build into the heels without laughing out loud. It's like a parody of Paul Simon's Diamonds on the Soles of her Shoes. What's up with you? Have you no class at all? FFS, as if the leather trousers weren't bad enough.
I cannot see you on a street corner in Shettleston with a fag in your mouth, a can of Superlager in one hand and a poke of chips in the other.
How do you prove your authenticity then, Theresa? Did you lose your soup pot? Did your caravan blow away? Did you miss your turn of the minoj? Or did the Tory pretense of being just like one of us come unstuck?
You are not one of us. Theresa. Honestly. You don't live in a block of flats for pensioners where there's no lift, so you're trapped indoors most of the time. You're not sitting at home waiting for a medical procedure that you've been told might take 6 months to come through. You're not a single mother of two in a flat paying an outrageous rent and expecting to be made redundant any day now, which will put you and the kids on the street next month. You're not borrowing off relatives and pestering the Social for money to feed your kids.
I've just got my Lovefilm movie for this week: I Am Daniel Blake. Are you shocked. Theresa, that Ken Loach could have made a film like this? Do you understand why the rest of us would be shocked by this movie? But in a different way?
Have you got a single empathetic bone in your body?
I'll only be around for - max - the next 10-20 years - but I hope to see you and your kind consigned to the dustbin in my time.
Sunday, 7 May 2017
Das Kapital
Forgive me if I'm overloading you by posting twice in one day. I just found this article on the BBC News website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39837515
It's headlined:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39837515
It's headlined:
What is Marx's Das Kapital?
There then follows a long article explaining about Karl Marx and his chef d'oeuvre. It's published because John McDonnell, depute leader of the Labour Party, was asked on a political programme if he was a Marxist and apparently had difficulty explaining what his views were. Actually I don't think he had any difficulty at all explaining what his views on the economy of the UK were: he's a smart guy, John McDonnell, more than up to the challenge of discussing political ideas. I think he found himself facing (1) an interviewer who regarded being a Marxist as some sort of crime and (2) he wasn't sure how to explain to the TV audience what he was talking about.
I'm dismayed: I've always thought the UK had one of the best educated populations in the world - and we should have, given how much we invest in education.
Maybe I've got that wrong. Maybe Marxism has dropped off university politics courses. Maybe no one in Labour or SSP Party circles ever raises the fair distribution of wealth in meetings. Maybe a large element of the UK population is suffering from collective amnesia and no longer recognises how unfair it is that the people who produce the goods, provide the services and keep the country going are paid with zero hours contracts, are rewarded with high taxes and low wages, and are regarded as scroungers if they can no longer contribute - and that includes the unemployed, the disabled and people like me, pensioners who worked and contributed for 50 years.
As well as that, I read today that 'rich' people earning £100,000 a year don't regard themselves as wealthy because they compare themselves, not to the rest of the population, but to other rich people. So if Richard Branson or an investment banker or the CEO of a minor company is pulling down mego-millions, the man on £100,000 feels poor. Meanwhile, I know people trying to get by on less than £9,000 a year.
And forgive me, but it's not envy. I don't actually bother that there are people out there earning gazillions more than I do. I'm not a gazillion type of gal: I went into public service to make a difference and was rewarded at the going rate. If you gave me loadsamoney, I'd either waste it on great holidays or give it away. Like most people, I suspect, I crave being 'comfortable.' You know what I mean: not dreading the sound of a bill hitting the carpet, being warm enough, having enough cash for treats for me and my family, and managing the odd day out.
But I know what Marxism is and I know why generations of people right round the world embraced Marxism last century - and I know why it will make a comeback. I always used to think I was living in an age when capitalism was triumphant. Now I think capitalism is failing. Right round the globe. The deal was: we do the work, the capitalists pay us. It's not happening now. So I wouldn't write Marxism off just yet.
I'm dismayed: I've always thought the UK had one of the best educated populations in the world - and we should have, given how much we invest in education.
Maybe I've got that wrong. Maybe Marxism has dropped off university politics courses. Maybe no one in Labour or SSP Party circles ever raises the fair distribution of wealth in meetings. Maybe a large element of the UK population is suffering from collective amnesia and no longer recognises how unfair it is that the people who produce the goods, provide the services and keep the country going are paid with zero hours contracts, are rewarded with high taxes and low wages, and are regarded as scroungers if they can no longer contribute - and that includes the unemployed, the disabled and people like me, pensioners who worked and contributed for 50 years.
As well as that, I read today that 'rich' people earning £100,000 a year don't regard themselves as wealthy because they compare themselves, not to the rest of the population, but to other rich people. So if Richard Branson or an investment banker or the CEO of a minor company is pulling down mego-millions, the man on £100,000 feels poor. Meanwhile, I know people trying to get by on less than £9,000 a year.
And forgive me, but it's not envy. I don't actually bother that there are people out there earning gazillions more than I do. I'm not a gazillion type of gal: I went into public service to make a difference and was rewarded at the going rate. If you gave me loadsamoney, I'd either waste it on great holidays or give it away. Like most people, I suspect, I crave being 'comfortable.' You know what I mean: not dreading the sound of a bill hitting the carpet, being warm enough, having enough cash for treats for me and my family, and managing the odd day out.
But I know what Marxism is and I know why generations of people right round the world embraced Marxism last century - and I know why it will make a comeback. I always used to think I was living in an age when capitalism was triumphant. Now I think capitalism is failing. Right round the globe. The deal was: we do the work, the capitalists pay us. It's not happening now. So I wouldn't write Marxism off just yet.
It's satire, people
I finally got round to watching this week's Have I Got News For You tonight. I've been complaining about how tame the programme has been this series, wondering if the people on the panel were being warned off making jokes about politicians with a general election coming up next month - or if they maybe just weren't very funny. But it picked up last night.
A lot of political parties got sent up: Conservatives, Labour, Libdems, SNP. One set of jokes was about Theresa May's habit of repeating the same phrases over and over. Andy Hamilton, a very sharp satirist (and one of my favourite regulars on HIGNFY) wondered if Theresa was showing signs of Alzheimer's. He immediately said he was not suggesting she had dementia but later he continued the theme, pointing out that she was accompanied on her 'canvassing' by a young man whose job was to show her how to ring doorbells.
You can see his contribution here:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/viewers-outrage-as-comedian-andy-hamilton-jokes-that-theresa-may-might-have-dementia-on-bbcs-have-i-a3532276.html
It seems viewers were 'outraged' by this. I haven't seen Jeremy Corbyn or Diane Abbott or Tim Farron objecting to how they were satirised. Nor has Andy Hamilton objected to being sent up himself for his role as the voice of Captain Squid on a Nickelodeon cartoon series for kids. Or Ian Hislop for being joshed with about teaching his facial expressions to his African Grey parrot.
It would be good to know if the BBC did in fact get complaints about Andy Hamilton's jokes or if the UK public is really pretty mature and educated and understands what satire is. That would mean, of course, that the (London) Evening Standard, now edited by George Osborne, was out there where George usually is, on a very shaky branch of a very shaky tree.
If it was up to me we'd see and hear more of people like Andy Hamilton, but it looks as if the only satire shows left are HIGNFY and the News Quiz - both BBC productions. How surprising then to find that the illiberal ole USA has many more satire shows than we have. But then they have Donald Trump...
A lot of political parties got sent up: Conservatives, Labour, Libdems, SNP. One set of jokes was about Theresa May's habit of repeating the same phrases over and over. Andy Hamilton, a very sharp satirist (and one of my favourite regulars on HIGNFY) wondered if Theresa was showing signs of Alzheimer's. He immediately said he was not suggesting she had dementia but later he continued the theme, pointing out that she was accompanied on her 'canvassing' by a young man whose job was to show her how to ring doorbells.
You can see his contribution here:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/viewers-outrage-as-comedian-andy-hamilton-jokes-that-theresa-may-might-have-dementia-on-bbcs-have-i-a3532276.html
It seems viewers were 'outraged' by this. I haven't seen Jeremy Corbyn or Diane Abbott or Tim Farron objecting to how they were satirised. Nor has Andy Hamilton objected to being sent up himself for his role as the voice of Captain Squid on a Nickelodeon cartoon series for kids. Or Ian Hislop for being joshed with about teaching his facial expressions to his African Grey parrot.
It would be good to know if the BBC did in fact get complaints about Andy Hamilton's jokes or if the UK public is really pretty mature and educated and understands what satire is. That would mean, of course, that the (London) Evening Standard, now edited by George Osborne, was out there where George usually is, on a very shaky branch of a very shaky tree.
If it was up to me we'd see and hear more of people like Andy Hamilton, but it looks as if the only satire shows left are HIGNFY and the News Quiz - both BBC productions. How surprising then to find that the illiberal ole USA has many more satire shows than we have. But then they have Donald Trump...
Wednesday, 3 May 2017
Glasgow Airport
The thing about Scots is we don't do riots. Even when we should be out on the streets giving politicians - among others - hell, we're not. What we're very good at is civil disobedience, so I wasn't really surprised to discover that Glasgow Airport's plan to charge us two quid a time to stop for seconds - seconds - to drop of passengers was being thwarted by the punters to such an extent that queues were building up on the M8 where no queues had ever been seen before.
I can just see what's going through the punters' minds: "Ach, tae hell: if I'm paying two quid for this 'stop and drop' I'll just take my time. And while we're here, let's just check if Kev and Leeanne have got their tickets and their passports."
Of course, there's a free 'stop and drop' but it's miles away and you have to get a bus to the terminal, which means getting to the airport even earlier than the insane 2 hours+ that's now demanded for check-in and security. So instead we'll just stop the car here outside this hotel, clogging up the access road, and maw, paw and the weans can climb out. Two quid saved. Result.
Don't get me wrong. I think the paying public are absolutely right. Think of what it now costs to go on holiday. And saving up for the holiday is not the end of it. You have luggage? Ker-ching! You want to avoid being trampled during boarding? Ker-ching! You want something to eat and drink before or during the flight? Ker-ching! And let's not forget the airport tax.
The one element that really irritates me is the constant complaining about drunk passengers. Yes, I've seen them at several airports getting tanked up on lager at 7am but I know they're doing that because they're on holiday, ffs! - and they just refuse to give the airlines any more money. I've stood in security queues at Heathrow watching young women drink a bottle of Bailey's (yuk) that they were told they couldn't take on the plane.
Travel is a rip-off and everybody - airlines, government, airport - gets a cut. But it all comes out of the pockets of the punters, who - I'm sure you've noticed - are feeling decidedly poorer than they were a decade ago.
The two quid drop-off is pure greed by Glasgow Airport. The charge won't reduce congestion, which the airport claim is what they want. But it will build up a lot of resentment among travellers. Remember the toll charges on the bridges? They've gone long since. We can do the same with 'stop and drop' charges at Glasgow, Edinburgh and Prestwick. And the sooner the better.
By the way, American Airlines, the shower that assaulted a man who declined to give up his seat and kicked a pram with a baby in it, don't allow any baggage allowance. treat their customers like cattle and are one of the reasons I will never go to the USA again. I'm not sure American Airlines is a role-model I want anyone in Scotland to copy.
I can just see what's going through the punters' minds: "Ach, tae hell: if I'm paying two quid for this 'stop and drop' I'll just take my time. And while we're here, let's just check if Kev and Leeanne have got their tickets and their passports."
Of course, there's a free 'stop and drop' but it's miles away and you have to get a bus to the terminal, which means getting to the airport even earlier than the insane 2 hours+ that's now demanded for check-in and security. So instead we'll just stop the car here outside this hotel, clogging up the access road, and maw, paw and the weans can climb out. Two quid saved. Result.
Don't get me wrong. I think the paying public are absolutely right. Think of what it now costs to go on holiday. And saving up for the holiday is not the end of it. You have luggage? Ker-ching! You want to avoid being trampled during boarding? Ker-ching! You want something to eat and drink before or during the flight? Ker-ching! And let's not forget the airport tax.
The one element that really irritates me is the constant complaining about drunk passengers. Yes, I've seen them at several airports getting tanked up on lager at 7am but I know they're doing that because they're on holiday, ffs! - and they just refuse to give the airlines any more money. I've stood in security queues at Heathrow watching young women drink a bottle of Bailey's (yuk) that they were told they couldn't take on the plane.
Travel is a rip-off and everybody - airlines, government, airport - gets a cut. But it all comes out of the pockets of the punters, who - I'm sure you've noticed - are feeling decidedly poorer than they were a decade ago.
The two quid drop-off is pure greed by Glasgow Airport. The charge won't reduce congestion, which the airport claim is what they want. But it will build up a lot of resentment among travellers. Remember the toll charges on the bridges? They've gone long since. We can do the same with 'stop and drop' charges at Glasgow, Edinburgh and Prestwick. And the sooner the better.
By the way, American Airlines, the shower that assaulted a man who declined to give up his seat and kicked a pram with a baby in it, don't allow any baggage allowance. treat their customers like cattle and are one of the reasons I will never go to the USA again. I'm not sure American Airlines is a role-model I want anyone in Scotland to copy.
Monday, 1 May 2017
Dear Pensioner,
Dear Pensioner,
I'm a pensioner too, but if you're the @rsehole who was interviewed on Channel 4 news tonight, I'm afraid that's all we have in common. It seems you couldn't possibly vote for Jeremy Corbyn because he doesn't wear a tie. Are you serious? Let me remind you of the old saying (well, it's old and it's a saying here in Glasgow at least): you can put a pig in a suit but he'll still be a pig.
George Osborne and David Cameron have lovely suits. But (1) Osborne is about to push off out of parliament to do the 4 jobs he just walked into - no interview, not tests - leaving the UK with debts of 1.7 trillion quid. And (2) Cameron threw the UK into a referendum that was meant to win over what John Major called the b@stards in his own party - and he lost. And the rest of us are left watching his successor, a total moron (Theresa May) backed up by other morons (Ian Duncan Smith and Boris Johnson), continuing down the same path. How about, in Corbyn's case, taking the opposite line: you can stand a man up without a tie and, if his ideas are good, he's worth voting for?
Can I just get you to lift your ideas out of the gutter where the Tory Party has put us?
It doesn't matter if you're a supporter of the Union or of independence for Scotland. A royalist or a republican. A Tory or Labour following on how your father and grandfather voted in the past. If you're a pensioner, there's a good chance you're not going to be around 20 years from now. I won't either. But we'll be able to leave our mark on the UK by how we vote in June. This is a really important election. Not for us but for the 30 something people in our families - and their children.
How do you want us pensioners to be remembered? As the selfish sods who voted Tory despite the fact that they are threatening to remove the 'triple lock' on pensions - the only decent thing the Tories have ever done for the elderly in living memory? And all this because you've swallowed the lies put out by the press and TV (well, the BBC) that Corbyn is 'unelectable.'
I've always believed pensioners voted out of a sense of duty but I also thought pensioners were engaged in what's called 'the political process' and would know to ignore Tory propaganda. What's happening here? Has everybody forgotten the famous speech by Nye Bevan:
"What is Toryism but organised spivvery? … No amount of cajolery can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party … So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin."
Think hard before you vote.
I'm a pensioner too, but if you're the @rsehole who was interviewed on Channel 4 news tonight, I'm afraid that's all we have in common. It seems you couldn't possibly vote for Jeremy Corbyn because he doesn't wear a tie. Are you serious? Let me remind you of the old saying (well, it's old and it's a saying here in Glasgow at least): you can put a pig in a suit but he'll still be a pig.
George Osborne and David Cameron have lovely suits. But (1) Osborne is about to push off out of parliament to do the 4 jobs he just walked into - no interview, not tests - leaving the UK with debts of 1.7 trillion quid. And (2) Cameron threw the UK into a referendum that was meant to win over what John Major called the b@stards in his own party - and he lost. And the rest of us are left watching his successor, a total moron (Theresa May) backed up by other morons (Ian Duncan Smith and Boris Johnson), continuing down the same path. How about, in Corbyn's case, taking the opposite line: you can stand a man up without a tie and, if his ideas are good, he's worth voting for?
Can I just get you to lift your ideas out of the gutter where the Tory Party has put us?
It doesn't matter if you're a supporter of the Union or of independence for Scotland. A royalist or a republican. A Tory or Labour following on how your father and grandfather voted in the past. If you're a pensioner, there's a good chance you're not going to be around 20 years from now. I won't either. But we'll be able to leave our mark on the UK by how we vote in June. This is a really important election. Not for us but for the 30 something people in our families - and their children.
How do you want us pensioners to be remembered? As the selfish sods who voted Tory despite the fact that they are threatening to remove the 'triple lock' on pensions - the only decent thing the Tories have ever done for the elderly in living memory? And all this because you've swallowed the lies put out by the press and TV (well, the BBC) that Corbyn is 'unelectable.'
I've always believed pensioners voted out of a sense of duty but I also thought pensioners were engaged in what's called 'the political process' and would know to ignore Tory propaganda. What's happening here? Has everybody forgotten the famous speech by Nye Bevan:
"What is Toryism but organised spivvery? … No amount of cajolery can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party … So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin."
Think hard before you vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)