Archive for May, 2016

IPSO FACTO

May 23, 2016

The Sun newspaper has had a judgement made against it by IPSO the press regulatory watchdog. The judgement refers to a complaint by Buckingham Palace regarding an article that appeared on the front page of the paper on the 9th March 2016.
The article implied that the Queen was in favour of a Brexit after they were informed by a source that she said that the EU was heading in the wrong direction. The Sun has published the findings but the editor Tony Gallagher disagrees and said that he would do the same thing again knowing the detail of the sourcing and conversation. I don’t know all the details but if the Queen actually said that she believes we should leave the EU then the media has a duty to report this. However, it was only reported that she is passionate about the EU and believes it is going in the wrong direction: This is not the same thing. I am also passionate about the EU and also Britain (having lived through its decline as a world power) and believe that the EU has lost its way, but I will be voting to stay on the 23rd of June. (I think we will be better off staying and changing the EU rather than leaving and risk wrecking it.) We all make mistakes and the editor should recognize and accept this.

PYLON THREAT

May 1, 2016

New cables are needed to connect a new power station at Sellafield to the grid. These would usually be supported on pylons erected across the countryside. However, this project would mean they would have to traverse the Lake District National Park along its south-west coast. The alternative, more expensive way of achieving this would be to bury the cables in the ground at an increased cost of around 450 million pounds. National grid, the company responsible for the project naturally prefers the cheaper solution but no decision has yet been taken and a consultation will be held prior to this. A commercial company cannot be expected to wait an inordinate amount of time for a return on its investment and would push for the cheaper solution. However, if a short-term levy were imposed on electricity bills to cover the extra cost we could have our cake and eat it too. A seventeen-pound hike spread over a few years would pay for it and wouldn’t jeopardise other projects. The proviso of course is that bills would return to normal when the work is completed.