I have decided to add this page to keep the best of the soapbox articles I have written. I feel I'm writing these articles, and some of them are good, but I'm not getting noticed. So someone out there notice me, because surely I've got a future in writing newspaper columns. Or maybe I'm dreaming.

As I've said on the main soapbox page, all the items on this page are my own personal points of view, and do not represent anyone else.

Best of Soapbox 2004
Best of Soapbox 2005 (Jan-Jun)
Best of Soapbox 2006 (Jan-May)
December 2005: Sony and DRM software
November 2005 - Pensions
November 2005 - Domestic Violence & Women's Aid funding.
October 2005 - KF
October 2005 - The elderly (part 2)
October 2005 - The elderly (part 1)
September 2005 - Fuel Costs
August 2005 - Freedom of Speech
August 2005 - Doctors not able to get jobs
August 2005 - Lottery funding for the Olympics.
July 2005 - Mold town centre and it's car parks.
July 2005 - Bombings in London
July 2005 - Live 8, Africa, G8 and climate change

December 2005

In the last couple of weeks Ive been following the ongoing saga (on various internet forums and in the media) about Sony and the DRM software its been installing with some music cds to supposedly stop the copying of the cds. I dont know if any music cds in the UK have been sold with this anti-copying software on them, but other parts of the world (such as the US) have come across it.

Now before I start, I better say that I dont know the corporate structure of Sony and its subsidiary companies. Not all Sony companies may be involved. Only the company that uses the Sony name and distributes music cds is probably involved. Also Id better add that Sony has said that it has recalled all the cds with this DRM software. This doesnt however mean that music cds with this software can no longer be purchased from some suppliers.

From what Ive read, I believe the DRM software uses similar technologies as spyware to hide itself from the user. I also believe that this DRM software is not mentioned in the license and cannot be removed easily (illegal in some countries. Lawsuits are already pending). Some are also saying that this software could be hacked to allow another port of entry to the users pcs for spammers/hackers/etc.

Now Ive had a rant about DRM and the music industry before on this soapbox. Im of the strong belief that if I buy an album, I should be allowed to make copies for myself (backups) and be allowed to transfer it to other media such as MP3 players or cassettes. This then allows me to keep the original in pristine condition. (If it got damaged, do you think the record companies would repair it or replace it free of charge like a television. No, neither do I. It doesnt come with a warranty against damage).

Anyway, the point Im trying to make is that as long as I dont pass it to anyone else, or sell it, or put it on the internet I dont believe Im doing anything wrong. I bought it. I own it. As long as it remains in my possession for my use, its okay. So the question is, why should a legitimate buyer of music cds be targeted in the fight against piracy? Why not target the P2P networks or the car booters who distribute/sell these copied music cds? For gods sake, Sony is one of the biggest corporations in the world. They have the financial resources to track down and prosecute these people. Or does that involve too much work.

Comparison time: Its like the police targeting speeders. Its easy to catch someone speeding. It involves detective work to catch a burglar (unless you catch them in the act). Id better just add that I believe the police are right to catch both speeders and burglars. It just seems that they put more effort (allegedly) into catching speeders.

What worries me is the people who arent computer literate and dont realise whats on their pcs. They dont have virus checkers or firewalls. Theyre probably harbouring numerous viruss/spyware, acting as zombie computers for the hackers and spamming those of us who do know about these things.

And can you imagine the glory for the first hacking group that manages to hack this software and distribute it via the music cds.

DRM is not going to go away. Music companies will find ever more sophisticated ways of stopping us copying their music cds. In essence, they are telling us what we can and cant do with our property even when what we do doesnt financial burden them. Who said the corporations arent taking over? Were moving into a Robocop world. You only have to look at a certain presidents defence of some of these corporations (economically) over the environmental damage some of them do (couldnt resist that dig!!).

While I agree with the aims of Sony (stop people selling/distributing copied music cds), their means of achieving this are wrong. By assuming we are all copyright thieves, they are alienating their customers and the artists they represent. A marketing disaster? Time will tell if theyve got a rabbit in the hat.

November 2005

There's a crisis looming. And it's going to affect us all.

A couple of soapboxes back I did two articles on the soapbox regarding the elderly and how badly they seem to be treated.

So obviously following on from those articles, we all had a think and decided to do something about it to ensure we don't end up in the same boat didn't we?

Lets reminis. Our parents worked all their lives. They paid their taxes/NI in the knowledge that when they reach the age of 60 (or 65 depending on their gender) they could retire and enjoy the rest of there lives with no worries about money. The pension would ensure that they never go without.

But times change. Successive governments have now ensured that the pension no longer gives them enough money to enjoy what is supposed to be the climax of there lives (You sometimes wonder if the government actual cares about the elderly!).

There has been a lot in the news recently about a report into the pensions, and the fact that the chancellor is opposed to some of the recommendations it makes. The fact is that any suggestion that will cost this government a serious amount of money will probably be ignored. (Just as they ignore anything else that requires a great deal of money such as the NHS. Have you tried to find an NHS dentist recently?).

One suggestion has been that we should all work until we are 67. Makes our lives worthwhile doesn't it watching the age at which we can finally fully enjoy them (if we had the money) slip further and further away (unless your in the public sector)!!

So what can we do about it. There was a time that personal or company pensions were offered as an alternative. The government said we should all get one at the time. My personal pension? Worth sod all. In the end I was advised by the company that sold it to me to opt back into the government pension as it was worth more. However, this is now blamed on the mis-selling of personal pensions. I signed on the dotted line. My fault!!

And as for company pensions, I'll just mention the Maxwell affair and the Mirror Group pensions that were stolen (allegedly). Need I say any more.

The fact is you can't please all the people all of the time. The government isn't going to put up taxes to pay for our pensions. That wouldn't be popular with the voters. But as we all live longer now, the money being paid out in pensions is going to increase. And where does that money come from? It doesn't grow on trees.

Radical solution time. Does anyone remember a film called Logan's Run. It starred Micheal York and Jenny Agutter (okay, okay. I admit it. I have a bit of a thing about Jenny Agutter. She looks good in this film and An American Werewolf in London. Cold shower time).

Anyway, back to Logan's Run. Set sometime in the future, it's about a society where you live to the age of 30, and then you're renewed (supposedly). This last day (your 30th birthday) is celebrated and then you enter the carrousel for renewal.

But some people know the truth. Renewal isn't all it's cracked up to be. And some people then go on the run to avoid the "renewal".

So here's demm42's radical solution to the pensions crisis. We all work until we're 45, and then we spend the next 20 years enjoying all of lives pleasures while we're still able to. Then at the age of 65, we all go for renewal!! Just think of all the benefits. No pensions crisis. Plenty of jobs for the young. Judges in courts who are actually of the same generation as the policemen/criminals. No more stairlift or adjustable bed salesmen who bully you to buy in your elderly years. So Tony if your listening (we're on first name terms. I know he's a regular reader of the demm42 soapbox. Ahem!!), I know tough decisions have to be made, but don't just dismiss the demm42 solution as inhumane. Consider it for all the it's benefits.

Anyway I'll leave this subject there.

Im not going to go into what happens behind these closed doors on this particular soapbox. Ill just say there is no excuse for it. Drink, drugs, anger, whatever. Its wrong. And I hope the blokes who do it will get there comeuppance someday.

Now dont get me wrong. Im not perfect. I have arguments with my wife. Sometimes she does get me that angry I could hit her. But I don't. If you read this soapbox regularly you'll know I don't approve of violence and certainly dont believe its the right way to have a relationship. Wanting to hit someone is not actually hitting someone (please dont assume Im trivialising here). As soon as you cross that line youre on a rocky road.

Anyway, I want to talk about what happens when the abused woman leaves the relationship. She packs her bags, her kids bags, and sneaks out (if the person involved doesnt lock them in). Where does she go? Her family may be able to help. Other times they dont want to know about it. Turn a blind eye. Disown her because they believe in the sanctity of marriage and no one should ever forsake that. Her self esteem is low. What can she do?

You may have heard of 'Womens Aid'. This organisation helps those women who have left (or are about to leave) abusive relationships. They run 24hr phone lines that offer support, have a network of safe houses for women who've just left their abusive relationship, help these families find new homes, and hopefully help these women to try and overcome what's happened to them and find a normal life again in the future. This is not to say the abused women will ever be able to forget whats happened. But they can try and move on.

Who funds Womens Aid? It costs money to run safe houses, run 24hr phone lines, etc

Now we get to the whole point of this soapbox. The Welsh Assembly has withdrawn some of the funding (from the Supporting People grant) from Delyn Womens Aid. Its like they don't care about the work Women's Aid do and brush it under the carpet. Oh, its only domestic abuse. Thats not important. Never happens. The result. This particular branch of women aid has had to cut back on staff and the services it offers. Thats a step in the right direction isnt it!!

Now I'm actually going to speak up for a politician here. Yes, a politician has raised his concerns about this during Minister's Question Time. Well done!! Will it do any good though. What do you think?

So can funding be sought from other sources such as local government. Some local authorities will happily fund artistic sculptures or campaigns to drop the word Christmas as it might offend non Christians (this one's bound to find it's way onto the soapbox soon), but when it comes to something that actually helps in a community, theyre not interested. Its about time these local authorities started seeing whats important in life. There are lots of people who need help in all walks of life. But the big wigs in charge just see them as drains on public money. Maybe thats true in a few cases. But the fact remains no matter what the problem is, there should someone people can turn to, and the sooner we accept that as a society the better.

October 2005

Kentucky Fried. Thats what they should call it. Why? Let me tell you.

Im a hypocrite. I run a website thats encourages people to explore other options for accommodation or a bite to eat (www.nearthemotorway.co.uk for those of you who dont know it yet) rather than use the service stations on the motorway.

However, I have a vice. KFC. I love KFC. Not too often mind you, otherwise it wouldnt be a treat. But several service stations do have a KFC, and as such get my custom because of this. The coating they put on the chicken is almost as good as naughty thing you might get up to in the bedroom with your missus (or someone elses missus if youre like that).

Anyway, its been a long day. The family is tired and ratty. Whats needed is a fix. A KFC fix. So fortune would have it that we were passing Corley services down near Coventry/Rugby. One of those few services that has a KFC.

In we go. Down to the KFC only to find that KFC has run out of chicken (well the chicken pieces anyway). What!! Disaster!! I was just looking forward to sharing a bucket with my family. And they havent got any. So I asked the helpful (I use that term very loosely) youngster on the tills (who looks like hes just got out of school) if he could replace the chicken in the bucket with fillets or popcorn chicken. Well actually I asked him twice because I obviously wasnt speaking teenager language so he didnt understand me the first time. Anyway I got a Im not allowed to do that Im afraid jobsworth reply. Yes you can. Ive been in KFCs where they have done that. Replaced some of the chicken pieces with fillets. KFCs where they want to keep the customer happy.

Has the KFC across the bridge got some chicken left? I ask. I dont know. Do you not communicate with them? Have you had a fall out? Are you married to them?

So we traipse across the bridge. Any chicken there? What do you think? We have to admit defeat and have a fillet burger. Any mini fillets? No. Only fillet burgers.

So like I said at the top, its obviously now Kentucky Fried (KF) or Kentucky No Chicken (KNC) or KFAC (Decipher that one yourselves).

First there was Rogue Traders on BBC1. If youve watched this program youll know it sets up to expose the cowboys in various trades. You know the sort I mean. Those people who overcharge you to fix a gas boiler and arent even CORGI registered.

Anyway, the programme on this week was about the selling tactics used to sell adjustable beds. Now dont get me wrong, Im sure that some people do require beds that adjust and help people lie down or sit up. The beds werent the problem. The sales technique was. The constant bombardment of the benefits of the beds to elderly people who cant get rid of sales people until they sign up (If you've read my double glazing salesman article, youll know what I mean). In fact one of the salespeople shown was almost bullying the elderly woman into submission. No sales pitch should take more than 30 minutes, never mind 3 hours (The company involved made a statement that no salesperson should be at any potential customer more than 3 hours).

Now just imagine if that was your mum or dad. Youd go mad. If I came in to find one of those salesman bullying my parents, I wouldnt like to say what would happen.

The second item was on the news. An 82 year old man was ejected forcefully from the Labour conference for heckling one of the ministers. When one of the other delegates complained about the handling of this elderly gent, he was ejected as well.

The Labour party did apologise, but by then the damage was done. I accept the comment that the stewards were the people at fault and not the party itself.

Now I dont want to get onto the freedom of speech topic again. We do now live in a more dangerous society, and if you read these soapboxes regularly youll know who I think is to blame for that. Terrorism is high on the agenda.

However, the right to freedom of speech is paramount. The actions on that day and the alleged actions of the local police force when dealing with people who wanted to demonstrate around the conference were too heavy handed. Lets not lose sight of what we were fighting for.

Back to the elderly. The third item relate to the elderly lady who refused to pay the increase in her council tax. She was jailed for 7 days I believe and was told by the magistrate (who could probably afford their council tax) she was not a martyr, she was a silly woman (or words to that effect).

Im going to sit on the fence on this one. As I said on the last soapbox, in all areas of society there are well off people and those who are poor. I dont know which bracket the lady above fell into. However Ill make a couple of points.

If youve worked hard all your life and paid your taxes, fought for your country in the wars, etc.. to get your large house, why should you be expected to fork out a large amount of money that exceeds your pension because your local authority uses the council tax to fill its shortfall in finances (allegedly). Why should you sell it and get a smaller place you can afford the tax on? Why cant you hold onto it and pass it on to your kids?

One the other side of the coin, why should the rest of us fork out extra money to subsidise a reduction in the payments for those people in the large houses that most of us will never be able to afford?

Ill leave you to make up your own mind on that.

Now, before I start Id better say that Im like most people. If Im driving and get held up by an older person on the roads, I curse like anyone else. If I hold a door open for an older person and they dont thank me, I moan about it. If Im held up in a shop because an older person is chatting or looking for their money at the tills, I mutter under my breath (particularly if its lunchtime as I only have an hour for lunch). And just try taking them on in the Post Office on pensions day.

However, having said all of that and having heard about something which Ill go into further down, I still think they get a raw deal in life.

Firstly, lets remember these people are our past. Some have fought wars so we can live the way we do today. Most will have made some contribution to todays society. But how do we thank them?

Numerous times on this soapbox Ive been on about yob culture and crime. No matter how sick it is, the fact is that elderly people are an easy target for yobs, criminals and even cowboy builders. Its doesnt matter if their disabled, blind, whatever, these sick cowardly individuals target these people because its easy money. And what happens when the police catch them. The courts let them off lightly. I dont need to say any more on this. Ive been here before on the soapbox, and no doubt Ill visit this topic again in the future.

The worst thing is can you imagine how much this money is worth to the pensioners whose only income is now the pension (and maybe a few benefits). Ah yes the pension.

A lot of elderly people moan (rightly or wrongly) about the amount of money they get for a pension. Now Im going to sit on the fence a little here. Firstly I accept that, as in society generally, there are well off people and poorer people. This must apply to pensioners as well. When you see pensioners spending money like its water in the posh hotels in Llandudno (or any other seaside town) and in Marks and Spencers (who arent the cheapest for food/clothes) you wonder how they can possibly complain about the pension amount. I dont begrudge them this. When you retire you deserve to have the best for the rest of your life. But it boils down to the fact that there are well off pensioners who have money put by, and others who dont.

Did anyone notice how in the last budget there was a few measures aimed at the pensioners. Free local bus travel, council tax refunds. Call me a cynic (youre a cynic!!), but were these measures put in the budget because a general election was looming. If so, are our pensioners really so naïve not to see it as such? Draw your own conclusions.

The local news not so long ago had a story about a pensioner whos now trapped in their home. Basically, theyve lived in this flat for over 20 years, but now their disabled. The flat is on the first floor. Can you see where Im going here? Basically, they cannot now leave the flat because there is no ramped access (only steps). The local authority wont pay to have a ramp built. Costs too much they say. However, they have paid out a good proportion of this cost on some concrete balls/sculptures. You know the sort of thing I mean. Art they call it. Now for the sake of balance, Id better just add they have offered to move this pensioner to another property which has easier access. But is this the point?

Moving on. Youre getting on now. Youre in your eighties. Youve lost some of the agility you had when you retired and now find it had to even do the simple things like clean the house. Youre still able to get about in your motorised wheelchair, but all the bending over and reaching up that you need to do to clean is no longer possible. You dont want to be moved into a home. Your relatives say you cant manage and should move to a home for your own benefit (or do they just want to get hold of the money tied up in your house). Youve lived in this house for 40 odd years. Who do you turn to?

This sickened me. I heard of this through a relative of such a person. This elderly person (who lived with another elderly relative) has lived in his house for over 30 years. As I said above, theyre not able to clean the house themselves and dont have any other relatives. So who do they turn to? Social Services. Yes well come out and clean your house. Itll cost you £10 an hour. Now am I the only person who thinks this is disgusting? They are going to charge a pensioner £10 an hour to come out and clean their house. If they come out 3 hours a week, thats £30 out of these elderly peoples pension. I dont know the exact amount a basic pension is, but I dont believe its more than £90 a week (correct me if Im wrong). A third of this money could be paid out to Social Services on cleaning if they lived on their own. Just remind me why we pay our taxes all our lives?

Well I that completes the first soapbox this subject. I just hope your looking forward to retiring as much as me!!

September 2005

Im sure you can guess the subject of the second soapbox this week. Its been mentioned numerous times before. Fuel costs.

Tomorrow (Wed 14 Sept 2005), fuel protests will take place again to highlight the concerns of road users about the ever increasing cost of fuel. The effect of these price hikes is felt by everyone, not just the road users.

Last week, the Radio 2 Lunchtime phone in included this topic and the protests about to take place. What I couldnt believe were some of the comments being made. One woman phoned in to say that her business was in a rural location with no public transport and without petrol her staff wouldnt be able to get to work. Another said that no one complains when a penny is added to the price of a loaf.

In response, a man pointed out, correctly so, that the only reason a penny is added to the price of loaves is because the supermarkets have to get back the money of the fuel increases when delivering the goods to the stores by putting up prices elsewhere. And the business in the rural location would lose all its staff if they couldnt afford the fuel to get there.

Why are people so blinkered that they cant see this?

Ill say it again just in case its not sunk in yet. Fuel prices affect us all whether we drive or not!! All the goods in our shops are delivered by lorries using fuel. Public transport uses fuel and as the costs go up, so does the cost of the tickets. If people cant travel, then the tourist industry will also suffer.

Rural areas really suffer. The Scottish highland communities who dont have any option but to use cars to get about are going to find it really hard. They dont earn anything like the high flying executives in London and as such will find that they cant afford to live in the rural village they love so much, and theyll have to move to a more populated area. This then destroys the rural communities (and gives the high flying executives holiday homes to buy in the process).

Do the government really care? They may make the right noises to the media, but the fact remains that the treasury gets a lot of money off fuel. Also, as people are forced off the roads because of the fuel prices this then alleviates the problem of congestion. So the high flying executives earning far too much money love the fuel price increases. These same executives may also help fund the political party campaigns at election times (allegedly), so no party is going to upset them by dropping the fuel prices for everyone else.

However what will the treasury do if enough people come off the roads meaning that the treasury starts to lose income. Will they then decrease the fuel prices? I think not. They just introduce another tax to hit us all again.

Back to the fuel protests. People have already been panic buying. One guy on the news saw the queue at a petrol station and thought perhaps hed better fill up. Why? Do you really think Tony Blair is going to allow the refineries to be blocked? Not a chance. Hell just threaten to send the army in. You see, we dont live in France where blockades make the government sit up and think. This is Britain. People power means nothing to the government. Its to be suppressed or ignored in their opinion.

So I say good luck with the protests tomorrow. I hope you achieve something, although I doubt you will. The middle east and the government wont make any radical moves to halt these increases. However, sooner or later something will have to give.

Finally, just on a separate but related note, Japan is to start full production of electric cars in 2010. Come on Mr Brown, youd better introduce a tax on electricity before its too late!!

---

August 2005

Freedom of Speech. Thats the subject of this soapbox, and a controversial one at that.

As you are probably aware, the government is looking at tighten up the law following the London bombings. They want to make incitement of terrorism a criminal offence.

Now before I start, Id better say once again that I dont believe that terrorism is the correct way to make a point in todays supposedly civilised society. Innocent people should not be made the targets when a point of view has to be made or for the actions of their governments.

When we went to war in Iraq, the initial reasons were because of the Weapons of Mass Destruction and to remove an evil dictator. The WMDs were never found, and the result of the removal of the evil dictator was a society thats nearly in civil war. Now dont get me wrong. I believe that Saddam was a threat to the world, and the UN didnt have to balls to tackle this threat. But that doesnt make it right for the US (and the UK) to go into the country to remove him. Why couldnt he be removed by the secret service (such as the SAS)? But thats not the topic I want to address on this soapbox.

The fact is that Iraq is now a democracy (or some form of democracy supposedly). Bush and Blair have made this point about the people of Iraq now having the power to decide their own future and Freedom of Speech.

However, by making it a criminal offence for people to speak out against UK society and how we live our lives is surely removing the very thing we were fighting for in Iraq. This is my point. How can we fight for Freedom of Speech when we are not allowed to speak freely ourselves? Now obviously this statement is very controversial.

It is not my intention to defend those who speak out of their hatred for this country and those who encourage the bombers. But they are hypocrites. They hate our society, but theyll take our benefits and insist on operations in our NHS hospitals. Theyll insist of being able to speak out, but if you went to some of their countries and spoke up for western values, youd be shot on sight. Surely if our society offends their beliefs so much they should move back to one of the countries that doesnt offend their beliefs.

At the end of the day its boils down to respect. I respect the right of any person to live there life how they want to, provided they dont inflict there beliefs on me or harm anyone else. By all means hold onto the traditions/principals of your countries/religion, but remember other people want to be able to do the same. This applies to all areas of society. Of course you can say why you live the way you do or what you believe in, but respect the right of other people do to the same.

Freedom of Speech should be exactly that. When the powers that be remove that Freedom they risk becoming dictators. This would then make the publishing of soapboxes like this one (and other blogs) a criminal offence. Is this the kind of society we want to encourage or live in?

Were back on the NHS. You may have heard last week about how trained doctors are now finding it hard to get a job. On the other hand, the NHS is also poaching doctors from African countries because of a shortage of trained doctors. Now is it me, or does something not add up here?

Now not wishing to repeat myself, I believe the main reason for this has been having the emphasis switched from patient care to saving money. The NHS has to be efficient with money and not waste it on red tape. I dont have a problem with the NHS cutting back on red tape and being efficient with money. However, from what Ive seen in the media the money seems to be wasted and never gets put into patient care in all its forms (doctors, nurses, equipment) as it should.

A couple of weeks back from the writing of this article, the BBC showed a documentary on how bad patient care really is in some of the wards at our hospitals. The scenes shown were shocking. These including, but were not limited to, a caterer telling a nurse to mind her own business, an elderly person being left to sit in there own faeces because another nurse didnt have time to clean him up and notes not being filled in correctly (or at all). Another program in the series showed how the contract cleaners were not actually doing the job properly (and/or not given the time to do it properly). And they wonder why bugs like MRSA have got into some of the hospitals? Patient care was patient dont care or havent got the time to care. The question has to be asked, if these problems hadnt been highlighted by the BBC, would they still be the same in the wards featured. And how many more hospitals/wards are the same.

Its all very well for the accountants/managers to sit in their offices seeing where cutbacks can be made at the front end without upsetting themselves by suggesting wage cuts and management cutbacks, but they should go down onto the front line without warning and actually question the customers, and by that I mean the patients who have been turned into customers because its now all money related. All customers in other areas of business deserve an amount of customer care. Its about time these penpushers saw this.

Now Id better just say that these comments dont apply to all hospitals. Some hospitals are good. However, for every few good hospitals there is probably one not performing so well. You just need to look behind the scenes.

The fact is in todays compensation culture there should be no need for payouts that are a result of negligence to the needs of a patient and cleanliness within our hospitals. Yes mistakes do happen. We are all human, and that cant be helped. Were not perfect. But NHS money should be going to the frontline where its needed and not on payouts to the people who let the standards drop or to people who have experienced a service less than reasonable as a result of these standards dropping meaning in some cases people coming out of hospital in a worse condition then when they went in.

Back to these trained doctors who cant get jobs. Whos tried to get an appointment at their local surgery. I cant fit you in for two weeks. Well I hope to have recovered by then. Some local GPs now only allow you to book appointments on the day. This results in a constantly engaged phone. Why cant some of these trained doctors be taken on at these local surgeries (even part time shared amongst the surgeries)? Yes I know the answer. Money.

Why do people still have to wait for years for an operation. Yes. Once again money.

Why do people who have money to pay for private care get a better service? Yes. Once again, money. And these people are in some cases the very people whove made the decision to cutback the services at the frontline. Maybe thats not a bad thing for them then. They get and can pay for the care we deserve. And on that note Ill finish.

Firstly, dont get me wrong. Im very happy that London got the Olympics (even though Manchester failed a few years back). By the UK getting it, it has been proved that politics dont have that much influence on the Olympic committee. The UK may be unpopular in the world over its actions in Iraq and its stance in the EU, but this doesnt seem to have deterred the Olympic committee.

However, should lottery money be used to fund it when there are people starving in the world, dieing from cancer/other diseases, and even childline is suffering a lack of funds. The question of who should benefit from the money raised by the lottery has been raised numerous times before.

Im a hypocrite. I buy lottery tickets just like everyone else. If how the moneys being spent bothers me, why do I fund what Im arguing against? Because like everyone else who does the lottery, I dream of better things for myself and my family. I dont want to continue as I am for the next 20 years and look back at my life and be disappointed. But thats getting away from the subject of the soapbox, although it does raise the point about money.

Unfortunately everything is about money. Companies and their shareholders only care about the money, not the employees who suffer when redundancies are made. Our local authority who featured on the last soapbox about car park machines/charges are looking to make redundancies. Money again. The US doesnt want to help with climate change if their economy suffers. Money once again. Money really does rule the world.

So if the lottery didnt fund the Olympics, who would? The taxpayer? The fact is it doesnt matter who funds it and where the money comes from, it will still be a commercialised event to raise the profile (and money) for the companies that sponsor it. In my opinion this goes against the spirit of the Olympics which was supposed to be an event where people can compete in various sports for the honour of their respective nations and prove themselves to be the best. Not money!!

At least if its funded through the lottery, people can choose not to support it financially. Taxpayers dont get that option. If the local authority doesnt provide the services you pay your tax for, you cant withhold the payment. If you didnt agree with the Iraq war, you cant withhold the portion of your tax thats being spent over there.

So although I dont like the idea of lottery money being used to fund the Olympics, I dont see any other options that I really agree with that are available. Its just a shame that the world today is so money driven, and this wont be changing for many years to come.

July 2005

On this soapbox, I'm going to talk about a couple of stories that been in our local papers. The same thing will probably take place or may have already happened in other areas of the country.

Over the last six months, our local papers have had stories about Mold town centre and how its losing trade to the big retail parks, in particular the one at Broughton (which I do frequent myself at times due to it being open into the evening). The Mold Saturday and Wednesday (in particular) markets have also started to lose traders.

Aside from the retail parks, other possible reasons for this alleged drop off in trade might be the council rates and the lack of parking facilities. I have to admit that parking on a Saturday is difficult unless you get in early, but Ive never really had a problem on the other days. I cannot really comment on the council rates though as I dont own a shop or trade on the market.

While were on car parks, Im going to have a little bit of car park rage here. I have one hour for lunch, so as you can appreciate I dont mess around during my lunch period. If Im going into Mold, I like to drive in (5 minutes), park the car, get a ticket, do whatever I have to do in Mold, drive back to work, and still have 25 minutes in which to eat my lunch. Its a pity other people dont think the same.

Yes its those drivers who dont consider the other users of the car parks by blocking the access roads that really gets my frustration levels up. You know the sort I mean. Theyve seen someone approach a car whos about to go, but theyve got children and bags of shopping to get in the car. No problem with that. It probably takes them about five minutes before theyre ready to drive off. In the meantime, some stupid driver has blocked the road for five minutes waiting for this space, even when there are other spaces not so far away. However, this space is important. Its a status symbol to them. Its only a 30 second walk to the shops from this space, instead of a minute from the other spaces not so far away. Lets waste 5 minutes for the sake of saving 1 minutes walking time. Yes, thats a good idea isnt it.

Secondly, we have those drivers who leave about 12 inches between their passenger side and the drivers side of your car. I had some idiot do this to me at Tescos Mold car park the other day. And it was on my lunch break as well. Now if Id put a big scratch down his/her car, theyd go mad wouldnt they. They wouldnt see that they were in the wrong. Fortunately I could get in the passenger side and climb over. But thats not the point. What if Id been an elderly driver? I would have had to go back in the store (presuming that this idiot was actually shopping in the store and not using the Tescos car park as a free car park for visiting the town centre), and get them to move it. Inconvenient for both parties. And you can bet they wont apologise for it.

Anyway back to the point. Mold town centre is losing trade. In fact the comment has been made in one newspaper a while back that its turning into a town of charity shops. Actually, there are numerous charity shops in Mold. More than any other town I know.

So the traders are looking for help from the local authority. Their response. Lets put in new car park machines and look into increasing the car park charges.

Yes, the Mold car parks have new machines that you have to enter you car registration into and then pay before you get a ticket that has the car registration printed on it. The idea behind this is to stop people passing on the tickets to other car park users. In other words being friendly to other visitors to the town, something you dont see a lot of these days. But who cares about good citizenship like this. They say its illegal, which to be fair it is. But what they dont say is that they dont like losing money because of this. Why dont they just hold up there hands and admit its the money they want? People are now saying they (the local authority) are acting like scrooge.

One final point here. How many of you can remember your car registration? You should be able to, admittedly. In fact all the previous cars Ive owned have had easy car registrations to remember. But this one Ive got now isnt easy to remember. Do you think the council will refund your money if you get it wrong at the machine by one letter/digit because you couldnt remember, or got flustered while keying it in by the queue of people behind you? I think you know the answer to that one.

So the council will now be getting more money from the car parks. What are they going to do to help the traders? Theyre proposing to increase the car park charges. Up to 3 hours will go from 20p to 30p, and all day parking from 50p to £1.50. A 300% rise. Not content with stopping people transferring the tickets (rightly or wrongly), they want to make them pay more. Unbelievable.

So what will be the result of this. More people will park at the supermarkets, on the residential streets near the town, or illegally on the streets in the town resulting in even more frustrated people. Counter productive I think is the term Id use.

Still, at least theyll have the money to employ a traffic warden that wasnt really needed before. And they might yet come up with some proposals that will actually help the traders in the town. Time will tell.

Well today the awful event that we have been warned about for months finally occurred.

The day after London was celebrating winning the right to host the 2012 Olympics, the terrorists struck with 4 bombs that exploded, and possibly more that didn't go off.

Obviously the thoughts of the nation go out to those who were caught up in the explosions and those who have lost relations as a result.

Initially reports were sketchy, but I soon as I heard it on the radio about 10am, I knew along with probably many other people that the reports were the results of the most hideous kind of terrorist, the sort that attacks innocent people to make their point. By the way, well done Radio 2 for keeping us informed through the day and not being light hearted like usual on such a sombre day.

While it's unconfirmed at the time of writing, this has surely got to be the work of terrorists claiming to be connected to Al Qaeda. A splinter group has claimed responsibility on a website, but obviously this is unconfirmed and not reliable. What sickens me, as with 9/11 is the thought that the fanatics supporting such actions will be laughing and cheering as they watch it on television.

Even during the IRA years, and all the attrocities they commited, they still had an understanding with the police and usually gave a warning before the event. There was no warning about these bombs.

So what have they achieved with their actions:

• Maximum publicity. With the G8 summit starting and London winning the Olympics, they couldn't have picked a better time.
• Mass carnage. They have killed and injured numerous people, all supposedly in the name of religion, the very thing that's supposed to unite people. This is assuming it was terrorists claiming to be connected to Al Qaeda.
• Maximum disruption. (One of my colleagues was actually in London yesterday, just around the corner from where one of the bombs exploded).

In fact they've probably united the UK against the terrorists. Before this mornings actions, a significant number of people were against the actions of the USA and UK when they invaded Iraq. Some people will even say that the blood shed today is on Tony Blairs hands. Even I have questioned the wisdom in invading Iraq on this soapbox. Why attack the people who generally believe that the UK armed forces shouldn't be in Iraq, the very people who are agreeing with your so called reasons for the bombs and final objectives of getting us out of Iraq?

I'll tell you why. They don't care. They have no regard for human life. How would they like it if we laughed when their families were getting killed. They wouldn't. They'd complain like hell.

The fact is it wouldn't matter whether we were in Iraq or out of Iraq. It wouldn't make any difference. They'd find some other reason for attacking us. Our political relationship with the USA. Our membership of the EU. Being a member of the G8. They wouldn't care. Whatever we did, they'd still attack us and other countries around the world. Some might say they get a kick out of it.

So what now. They given the leader of the USA and UK the very reasons why it was justified invading Iraq. Thanks for that. As a worst case scenario, they've basically they given the green light for the USA and the UK to go and invade any country that has terrorist links. And who would question or blame us for doing that.

The world has just become a more dangerous place.

Update: As a result of these bombings, the government is now proposing to toughen the terrorism laws to include new laws to tackle those who promote or encourage terrorism. Does this mean that Tony Blair and George Bush will have to make a court appearance or be thrown out of this country? I mean, some people are of the opinion that they encouraged this terrorist act by invading Iraq.

Right, firstly Id better say that I didnt see the whole concert, and only really saw the acts from the Scissor Sisters onwards.

Anyway I particularly enjoyed the Scissor Sisters, The Who and Pink Floyd. Paul McCartney and Sting were good as well.

However, from my point of view, it was Robbie Williams who put on an excellent performance that stole the show. While Im not a particular fan of his, I have to say that the way he included the crowd gathered at Hyde Park was almost on a par with that of Freddie Mercury at the concert 20 years ago.

My only disappointment was the fact that some of the other big artists who appeared at the other concerts around the world were not given more time on air (such as Stevie Wonder). Also, the way they cut off Peter Kay while he was filling in before The Who (he was making me laugh) for an interview with one of the performers annoyed me.

The final thing that seems to have caused some controversy is the swearing by some of the performers. Children could have heard it are the comments of some people. They just dont like to hear language like this.

Right, firstly Ill say I dont condone swearing. However, Id be a hypocrite if I said I dont swear. I do. Sometimes, without me realising it, my daughter hears me. Does this make me a bad parent though?

I dont like my daughter swearing. Some of the language she sometimes comes out with is borderline. She may have picked it up from me, school (the language of some of the children/parents is a bit choice sometimes) or generally out and about (why is it some 10/11 year olds or even teenagers think its so big to swear?).

However, back to the concert. In some contexts, the swearing may be justified to make the point. Other times, its just not necessary. The fact is though forget the swearing, its Africa that should be on the headlines, not the language of the performers, whether justified or not.

Will the G8 leaders take any notice? I think we already know the answer to that unfortunately.

While, at the time of writing, it has been indicated that certain announcements will be made about Africa, the general consensus it that not enough will be done. While it is accepted that certain African nations require a change of leaders before the people can really be helped, how long must they suffer (the people) before pressure is brought on these nations. If the Iraq war was about invisible Weapons of Mass Destruction, sorry removing an Evil Dictator, why has no direct action been taken against countries like Zimbabwe which, according to media reports, have been allegedly suppressing opposition supporters by various means? I wonder if any action would be taken if Zimbabwe had Oil?

Secondly, climate change will be discussed at G8. And we all know who is standing in the way of progress here. When will George Bush start putting the interests of the citizens of the planet Earth ahead of the needs of the big corporations that fund his administration (allegedly) and, in some cases, pollute the atmosphere for the rest of us (allegedly). Various sources (media/internet) do say that the US is the worlds biggest polluter.

For the sake of balance, I better just say that its not just the G8 countries that need to act; its the whole world and all the businesses in this world. However, the G8 countries do need to get the ball rolling and show the way forward to the other countries.

Finally, George Bush has made comments that Tony Blair should expect no favours at the G8 summit and that he will go to it with an agenda which is best for his country. I read this as saying we (the UK) were his puppets in Iraq, and the only people he cares about are his voters and the corporations that fund his administration (allegedly). I only hope that future generations will remember this stance and thank him for making the world of the future the toxic place its predicted to be.

Maybe hes right though. Maybe all the scientists/environmentalists warning us about climate change are doomongers and have got it wrong. Maybe things arent as bad as they make out. Maybe the scientists (are these funded by the US government or US corporations?) who say its not all bad are right in their assessment. Do we want to take that chance though? Once the damage is done, its too late.