Let's concentrate on local matters now and those issues that concern the pleasant environs of Bournemouth (in the south of England for those that weren't sure). This particular case however is not necessarily one that merely affects the corridors of power in this tourist destination.
A few weeks ago, it emerged that the Tory leader of the council, Cllr. Stephen MacLoughlin, had accessed pornographic material on a council computer, albeit not during office hours nor on council premises. So is Cllr. MacLoughlin's crime merely failing to abide by the council internet policy, or is it, as the leaking of the story would suggest, a more contemptable mistake, punishable by the local populous? Readers from the paper complained that viewing 'top-shelf' material was not the appropriate behaviour of a civil servant who should be promoting stronger family ties, not indulging in the ephemeral pleasures of the flesh.
So what should happen to MacLoughlin? In the eyes of authority, he has committed the sin of causing embarassessment to the Conservative Party, an offence that could deem expulsion and he failed to comply with the council's internet policy. Fellow councillors are also exasperated as to why the investigation into the affair was not previously made known to them with hints of an attempted cover-up.
As previously stated, some readers won't be surprised by these revelations. This type of story has probably been told in some guise since the beginning of time except the means and technology have now changed. Most of us though may still have misgivings that they centre around a man responsible for upholding morally decent civic values. Leering at women on the internet doesn't come under that umbrella although it is an activity that many members of society, no matter their standing, are guilty of indulging in. MacLoughlin has expressed sorrow for the incident but refuses to stand down despite pressure from his colleagues. The first meeting since the news became public, held on Friday 30th October, may have changed his mind.
From a moral perspective, what standards do we still demand from our leaders and can they be forgiven and afforded another chance when they fall short? Or are we right to yearn for strong figures, neither tempted or swayed by external distractions and always willing to assume responsibilty for their failings? The distinction needs to be made that there are moral misdemeanours and there are genuine crimes, punishable by law. Perhaps Cllr. MacLoughlin should fall on his sticky sword if his colleagues and those whom he serves view his behaviour as disreputable. Whether this lapse is an indictment of whether Cllr. MacLoughlin is capable of fulfilling his civic duties is subject to debate.
Friday 30 October 2009
Monday 26 October 2009
Two Points as Signs of Life Emerge
Since Gary Waddock took charge of Wycombe Wanderers, the Blues have notched two points against rivals Colchester United and Exeter City. Wycombe remain bottom of the League One table, two points adrift of Tranmere Rovers and six from safety but signs of life are beginning to emerge.
Jon Paul-Pitman continues to display what a valuable asset he is to the club and it was his late equaliser against Colchester that secured a point. Fortunes were reversed however when the Blues faced Exeter at St. James' Park on Saturday with Barry Corr's header, again a goal conceded from a set-piece, deep into stoppage time that denied Wycombe their first away win of the season and Waddock's first in charge.
There do remain concerns however the signs of promise from the team appear to have the fans reinvigorated with a crucial home game against Walsall next Saturday to look forward to. It will be interesting to see whether the new manager alters the playing personnel or whether he believes that there is enough quality in the squad to avoid relegation. Could it be the previous system and style of play that were to blame for poor results? Against Exeter, Waddock employed the much maligned 4-5-1 formation that his predecessor favoured. One thing is certain, the Blues need a win quickly to give them confidence as they head into deepest winter.
williwycombe is an exile from the fair town of High Wycombe so does not get to attend many matches. Therefore his views and opinions should be treated thusly and not dissected as if he were some expert who actually witnessed events unfold first hand.
Jon Paul-Pitman continues to display what a valuable asset he is to the club and it was his late equaliser against Colchester that secured a point. Fortunes were reversed however when the Blues faced Exeter at St. James' Park on Saturday with Barry Corr's header, again a goal conceded from a set-piece, deep into stoppage time that denied Wycombe their first away win of the season and Waddock's first in charge.
There do remain concerns however the signs of promise from the team appear to have the fans reinvigorated with a crucial home game against Walsall next Saturday to look forward to. It will be interesting to see whether the new manager alters the playing personnel or whether he believes that there is enough quality in the squad to avoid relegation. Could it be the previous system and style of play that were to blame for poor results? Against Exeter, Waddock employed the much maligned 4-5-1 formation that his predecessor favoured. One thing is certain, the Blues need a win quickly to give them confidence as they head into deepest winter.
williwycombe is an exile from the fair town of High Wycombe so does not get to attend many matches. Therefore his views and opinions should be treated thusly and not dissected as if he were some expert who actually witnessed events unfold first hand.
Thursday 22 October 2009
Are We all Free to Make our Mind up About the BNP?
The BBC has defended itself against those who have criticised their decision to allow the British National Party leader Nick Griffin to appear on its flagship show, Question Time, this evening.
The director-general Mark Thompson has argued that not allowing the BNP on television would be 'censorship'. Meanwhile up to 300 police officers will line the television centre to prevent any disturbances from anti-racist campaigners escalating.
The BNP's recent success in this year's European elections, where they won 2 seats in the continental parliament, raised the extreme party's profile whose leader Griffin has made comments in the past such as 'the ultimate aim...still remains an all white-Britain' to the Financial Times in 2002.
He has also encouraged ferocious chagrin from the mainstream media fundamentally opposed to the party's principles. In the build up to the show, Griffin has already courted controversy this week by criticising former Army generals, including General Sir Richard Dannat, accusing them of being akin to Nazi war criminals for their involement in Afghanistan and Iraq, even going so far as to provocactively state that those Nazi generals were eventually hanged for waging illegal wars.
No matter what Griffin says and whatever reaction he provokes, should he be free to espouse views of hatred, often neatly packaged for the media he loathes to give them an acceptable facade, or should we censor and restrict partys like the BNP, in direct opposition to the spirit of democracy?
There is of course, as demonstrated by BNP successes at the ballot box, a danger that the propoganda machine of the far-right will cherry pick key issues that some members of the electorate can relate to; immigration, over-population, resource competition to name a few, thereby promoting the BNP's position on these subjects as an attractive one to those who are vulnerable and fearful of their own seat in society.
Democratically, despite protestations, the BNP are a legitimate political party and voters are entitled to choose to support them.
Most decent folk know that the veneer of respectability that the BNP have worked hard in recent years to cultivate, is nothing more than a sham with many newspapers exposing the often disturbed, criminal and downright weird element that reside in the inner sanctum of the party.
This is despite BNP claims of support from teachers, professors and other high ranking officials who the party count as their sympathisers. I am in no doubt that there are probably those who inhabit the lofty echelons of society who may sympathise with the BNP.
Immigration, multi-cultralism and British national identity are key issues that have been carefully tip-toed around for too long by the mainstream political parties. A population of 70 million in Britain within 20 years apparently does not keep Home Secretary Alan Johnson 'awake at night'.
But what of the issues surrounding infrastrucure, supply of resources and everything else this would entail?
It is these topics that the BNP touch upon that merit discussion, not the party's crude line on racial purity and immigrant repatriation. In allowing Nich Griffin on Question Time, a leader of a party whose constitution is inherently racist, the BBC awared him perhaps the finest political platform.
In their opinion, this may be democracy in action, but at what cost? Will the BNP attract more voters dissatisfied with the mainstream who might be looking for a protest vote or will Griffin be rightly exposed?
The director-general Mark Thompson has argued that not allowing the BNP on television would be 'censorship'. Meanwhile up to 300 police officers will line the television centre to prevent any disturbances from anti-racist campaigners escalating.
The BNP's recent success in this year's European elections, where they won 2 seats in the continental parliament, raised the extreme party's profile whose leader Griffin has made comments in the past such as 'the ultimate aim...still remains an all white-Britain' to the Financial Times in 2002.
He has also encouraged ferocious chagrin from the mainstream media fundamentally opposed to the party's principles. In the build up to the show, Griffin has already courted controversy this week by criticising former Army generals, including General Sir Richard Dannat, accusing them of being akin to Nazi war criminals for their involement in Afghanistan and Iraq, even going so far as to provocactively state that those Nazi generals were eventually hanged for waging illegal wars.
No matter what Griffin says and whatever reaction he provokes, should he be free to espouse views of hatred, often neatly packaged for the media he loathes to give them an acceptable facade, or should we censor and restrict partys like the BNP, in direct opposition to the spirit of democracy?
There is of course, as demonstrated by BNP successes at the ballot box, a danger that the propoganda machine of the far-right will cherry pick key issues that some members of the electorate can relate to; immigration, over-population, resource competition to name a few, thereby promoting the BNP's position on these subjects as an attractive one to those who are vulnerable and fearful of their own seat in society.
Democratically, despite protestations, the BNP are a legitimate political party and voters are entitled to choose to support them.
Most decent folk know that the veneer of respectability that the BNP have worked hard in recent years to cultivate, is nothing more than a sham with many newspapers exposing the often disturbed, criminal and downright weird element that reside in the inner sanctum of the party.
This is despite BNP claims of support from teachers, professors and other high ranking officials who the party count as their sympathisers. I am in no doubt that there are probably those who inhabit the lofty echelons of society who may sympathise with the BNP.
Immigration, multi-cultralism and British national identity are key issues that have been carefully tip-toed around for too long by the mainstream political parties. A population of 70 million in Britain within 20 years apparently does not keep Home Secretary Alan Johnson 'awake at night'.
But what of the issues surrounding infrastrucure, supply of resources and everything else this would entail?
It is these topics that the BNP touch upon that merit discussion, not the party's crude line on racial purity and immigrant repatriation. In allowing Nich Griffin on Question Time, a leader of a party whose constitution is inherently racist, the BBC awared him perhaps the finest political platform.
In their opinion, this may be democracy in action, but at what cost? Will the BNP attract more voters dissatisfied with the mainstream who might be looking for a protest vote or will Griffin be rightly exposed?
Friday 16 October 2009
Taylor ‘walks away’ as Waddock and Kuhl Waltz into Wycombe
A whirlwind weekend in Wycombe Wanderers’ history has developed into a fresh mini-saga complete with a soap storyline accompaniment. Peter Taylor and his assistant Junior Lewis left the club by mutual consent on Friday afternoon leaving youth team coach Richard Dobson to take charge of the 3-2 defeat away at Gillingham the following day. Dobson was quoted as stating that his tenure would last for just one game and that he expected to be coaching the youth side on Monday.
On Tuesday afternoon it emerged that successful Aldershot Town boss Gary Waddock and his assistant Martin Kuhl are to take charge of the Chairboys in a chain of events that leaves many fans questioning Taylor’s departure and the quick-fire appointment of the new team at the helm. The official line coming out of the club has been that the decision to relieve Taylor of managerial duties was one made mutually with head of communications Alan Parry describing the former boss as an ‘honourable man’ who had seemingly taken the team as far as he possibly could.
Despite a disappointing start to the season, Taylor remains only the second manager to win promotion with the Blues during their Football League history and after just twelve games perhaps Chairman Steve Hayes’ patience was quickly wearing thin. Hayes has made it no secret that he is eager to transform the club into a force to be reckoned with in League One and no doubt the start to this campaign had left him, along with a section of the fan base, disillusioned. There are those however that subscribe to the belief that the problems lay not with the personnel but with the tactics employed and that this factor, combined with Taylor’s stubbornness or perceived reluctance to change the system, contributed to his exit.
When he resigned following the play-off defeat to Stockport County, former boss Paul Lambert insinuated that there were a few things that were not quite right behind the scenes at the club. It will interesting to see over the next few days and weeks whether lightning has struck twice and will Gary Waddock be able to change the team’s fortunes on the pitch?
On Tuesday afternoon it emerged that successful Aldershot Town boss Gary Waddock and his assistant Martin Kuhl are to take charge of the Chairboys in a chain of events that leaves many fans questioning Taylor’s departure and the quick-fire appointment of the new team at the helm. The official line coming out of the club has been that the decision to relieve Taylor of managerial duties was one made mutually with head of communications Alan Parry describing the former boss as an ‘honourable man’ who had seemingly taken the team as far as he possibly could.
Despite a disappointing start to the season, Taylor remains only the second manager to win promotion with the Blues during their Football League history and after just twelve games perhaps Chairman Steve Hayes’ patience was quickly wearing thin. Hayes has made it no secret that he is eager to transform the club into a force to be reckoned with in League One and no doubt the start to this campaign had left him, along with a section of the fan base, disillusioned. There are those however that subscribe to the belief that the problems lay not with the personnel but with the tactics employed and that this factor, combined with Taylor’s stubbornness or perceived reluctance to change the system, contributed to his exit.
When he resigned following the play-off defeat to Stockport County, former boss Paul Lambert insinuated that there were a few things that were not quite right behind the scenes at the club. It will interesting to see over the next few days and weeks whether lightning has struck twice and will Gary Waddock be able to change the team’s fortunes on the pitch?
Wednesday 7 October 2009
New Government, New Dawn?
By the end of June 2010, it looks increasingly likely that Britain will be led by a new Conservative government faced with old questions; the economy, Afghanistan, confronting crime and the environment to name a few. Then there are those issues that will come to the forefront in subsequent years. Will Britain align with the United States on the world stage and agree to co-operate on solving problems in the Middle East and quelling the threats from Iran and North Korea? How will the Western superpowers deal with voracious China and the simmering veiled menace of former foe Russia? Energy and food security combined with climate change (man-made or part of a natural cycle, you decide) are also increasingly complex subjects for Britain as a member of the internatonal community to contribute towards solving.
This week at their annual party conference in Manchester, the Conservatives have been busily outlining their vision of the future. There is a focus on work, graft and the neccessity for massive cuts and public sector pay freezes. Critics have labelled the Tories bleak, the counter argument is that they are merely offering a heavy dose of realism that the country appreciates having been forced to swallow the soundbites of spin that have emmanated from New Labour for far too long.
Not completely enamoured by the Tories or David Cameron but seemingly desperate for some form of change, the British public need to know what changes they can expect, if any, from a new government. It is not entirely clear whether the new dawn will be positive or disasterous, not just for Britain but for everyone.
This week at their annual party conference in Manchester, the Conservatives have been busily outlining their vision of the future. There is a focus on work, graft and the neccessity for massive cuts and public sector pay freezes. Critics have labelled the Tories bleak, the counter argument is that they are merely offering a heavy dose of realism that the country appreciates having been forced to swallow the soundbites of spin that have emmanated from New Labour for far too long.
Not completely enamoured by the Tories or David Cameron but seemingly desperate for some form of change, the British public need to know what changes they can expect, if any, from a new government. It is not entirely clear whether the new dawn will be positive or disasterous, not just for Britain but for everyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
