A Quick Fire Overview

Okay, for a change I thought I might change the format of my next blog and compile a small summary of my thoughts for the week into one..

I would hate to think that the government would even think of taking advantage of the glorious rampage to tackle the national deficit by unscrupulously disposing of services which we don’t even see in the chaos.  Heaven forbid they go further and hide any other misdoings behind the visible figures..  Keep an eye on them.

Somali pirates seem to be having a “wail of a time” at the moment, primarily because they aren’t being countered with effective responses, nor in many cases can they be effectively tried when caught due to a lack of stable government and diplomatic legal procedures in their homeland.  Okay, so it’s possible to argue that some of the pirates are may be people desperate enough in their plight, or forced to serve organised crime from without and within their country.  So, here’s a possible solution.  Set up an international blockade around Somalia, including the coastline.  Nothing gets in or out of the country without a search and documentation – zero tolerance.  Anyone caught in breach of import/export rules established to distinguish between benign inventory such as food and such provisions and malevolent items such as weaponry will have their cargo seized and under the initial presumption of being an innocent party to criminal coercion, they will be detained and handed over for a fair trial (based upon humanitarian and international maritime laws) to establish their role, their circumstances and the names of any of their contacts.  Make it known that anyone who resists detention will have their cargo destroyed and they will be summarily executed.  I would guess that’s a little more effective in both action and disincentive than patrolling 4km square areas with underpowered, ill-equipped boats.  It’s funny that the oil and cargo companies don’t take this all more seriously, unless of course it’s all a compensation scheme to make more money claiming on the missing cargo.. hmm..

Finally, on the matter of voting rights for prisoners.. please, come on guys!  GET A GRIP!!  There are very few times that I agree with a number of politicians at once, but I get the feeling the members of the European Parliament simply haven’t sat and thought about the raison d’etre for incarceration where this little legal morsel is concerned.  When someone is imprisoned they have a right to fair conditions and treatment, but ethically they cannot be granted a slice of political decision-making whilst they are imprisoned.  As a criminal they may have been removed from society for any number of reasons, from murder to fraud, but the one thing which unites them all is the fact that incarceration means the loss of some basic freedoms of choice.  This is their punishment.  Since the abolition of capital punishment, prison itself is now supposed to be the ultimate civilised disincentive to criminal behaviour, but if they are to be allowed any influence the system which holds them, we may as well grant them the right to decide whether or not they are imprisoned.

Peace

The Hot African Winds

Okay, so we’ve had the Iraq War, global recession and the subsequent and continuing behaviour of the banks.. so many various gaffes from so many political bodies across the globe, but just when you thought life couldn’t present us with anything more implausible..  Two of Malawi’s most senior judicial officers are currently arguing over whether the scope of a recent public order offense bill is broad enough to encompass ‘public flatulence’.  I kid you not.  The bill reads "Any person who vitiates the atmosphere in any place so as to make it noxious to the public to the health of persons in general dwelling or carrying on business in the neighbourhood or passing along a public way shall be guilty of a misdemeanour”.  It seems that there is a legal description stating quite specifically “fouling of air”.  One lawyer has dared to contradict Justice Minister George Chaponda, stating that the description must realistically be intended to cover pollution of a chemical industrial nature, and that no one could seriously be trying to legislate against farting in public, but there isn’t any elaboration on this point.  The official line states that in the event of needing to expel gas then one should simply ‘go to the toilet’.  Apparently this law will be enforced by methods equally applicable to dealing with those who choose to urinate in public.

Excuse me whilst I allow myself a little leeway to play devil’s advocate..

What do you do if you’re in a compromised position such as a very long queue, on a bus, in a taxi or god forbid, a lift?  What if an officer witnesses a crime of any description, and in the process of dealing with the assailant he or she is overcome with an ‘urge’?  What if the officer issuing you with a ‘fart ticket’ then proceeds to fart themselves?  Do they make a ticket out and go back to the office?  Are politicians going to be subject to this bylaw?  Do diplomats still carry political immunity?  Where can this all end?  I would also imagine that the social habits of the Malawi people are going to be a borderline spectacle as a constant flow of people run into and out of public conveniences across the length and breadth of the country, trying to avoid a criminal record.  Can I suggest to Rupert Murdoch that he reserves some satellite airtime for a live “Malawi-Watch” programme, perhaps narrated by Tony Robinson, dedicated to the endless entertainment to be had from the chaos?  They could probably even construct a game show around it.  If this legislation seriously comes to pass (no pun intended) how long will it be before there is a ‘fart tax’?  Or maybe this is all in readiness for a system designed to power the state and promote green energy?  Rationalise this as you will!

You know, when you consider the problems which any country faces one would be tempted to think that this might settle somewhere pretty low on ANY list of national concerns.  So, I think there can only be one possible conclusion - this has to be a distraction from something much more serious.  The leaders of Malawi must be sat on something so politically outrageous that they decided any form of distraction would suffice, to detract from something so mind numbingly horrifying that even the world’s most hardened heart might raise a point or two of concern.  Have they attained nuclear power, or discovered an alien vessel poking up out of the tundra?  On the other hand, maybe there is no master plan, in which case they might want to consider the following.  Practically speaking, urinating is generally easier to resist than farting - not that I’m admitting in any way to any first-hand experience of breaking wind in public.  If I ever have the need or desire to go to Malawi and they read this then they may think twice about stamping my passport.  Actually, come to think of it, if this whole thing still seems more than a little preposterous then just spare a thought for little old me.. I can’t believe I’ve actually written this.

Peace

Anyone Up For a Rewrite?

I read an interesting report on the BBC website today (4/2/11). Allow me to extract (without any bias) the following:

Britons are the most anxious about immigrants, an international survey of eight European and North American countries has suggested.

• 23% of British people thought immigration was the country's biggest problem, compared with 10% in the EU (Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and France) and the US & Canada - the findings came even though five of the nations had a greater proportion of foreign people in their populations.
• 59% of Britons believed there were "too many" immigrants - In Germany and the Netherlands, both countries with a higher level of foreign-born residents, the figure was 27%.
• British respondents were the most likely to say immigrants were a burden - about a quarter of UK respondents did not think even legal migrants should be allowed to access the NHS or state schools - in other European countries the figure ranged between 1% and 5%.
• Seven out of 10 people in the UK said their government was doing a poor job in managing immigration - this was behind only the US (73%).

Okay, as actor Henry Silva said in the film ‘Amazon Women on the Moon’, “What do we think?  Bulls**t or not?”.  Let’s take a look.

Overall I’d say the biggest issue the UK faces IS one of poor management, compared with other EU and US states.  It’s logical that when you have a steady influx of immigrants, any country is eventually bound to run out of living space.  What is also true (and would probably cover the vast majority of ill feeling out there) is that other states have certain, quite reasonable requirements from their new citizens - paramount of which is (I would imagine) a willingness to integrate and be productive within the new society which is welcoming them with conditional, but open arms.  The integration is a hard one to tackle without this simple premise because people don’t seem to gel quite as much as perhaps they should.  I’ve seen it and felt it for myself, but I believe this would moderate itself if people were more straight with one another and the system was fairer (we will see this last matter again in a bit).  As it stands I would say the vast majority of people in the UK who are riddled with anxiety over immigration are feeling this way because we seem to pretty much indulge in giving handouts.  Again, if the system was fairer and the handouts moderated, a lot more people would I think have a milder attitude because we wouldn’t be the pushover that we are rightly perceived to be.  If we didn’t have a system which was so overwhelmingly complicated, corruptible and slow to adjust then it would likely as not function as intended, instead of being so incomprehensible to so many, riddled as it is with the many “bolt-on” quick fixes and inconsistencies.  Even the system of law itself is in the same sorry state which might explain a lot, and all serves to highlight what we need to do to fix it.  Simplify.

..However, nearly three quarters thought the government should allow more foreign doctors and nurses into the UK and just over half wanted more foreign care workers for the elderly

Hang on..  a minute ago, generally speaking, we didn’t like the idea of immigration but just over half of those surveyed think it perfectly acceptable to have an influx of foreign workers if they are going to fill the positions all our own qualified staff have abdicated? Before this aspect it seemed that the argument was a straight forward matter of common concerns of physical space and sustainability, the UK being approximately many times smaller than most of the alternative states being mentioned.  However, it now seems that we're happy to draught foreign workers in because we've become a nation of people who simply don’t want to have to be bothered with our own mothers and fathers?  How exactly am I supposed to interpret this report?

For those who read my blogs, it’s probably common knowledge that I have a relationship with an East Asian woman, so I would like to use my perspective as someone in an interracial relationship for the benefit of all, and speak some truths.  It’s for certain that here in the UK the matter of racism will repeatedly rear its head.  In part it’s because of many notorious political happenings of the past, but for a long time now I’ve heard it mostly recently from people crying wolf.  Without a doubt, some immigrants will have legitimate need of refuge, facing indescribable punishments or worse in their own lands.  As we watch the revolutions spread across the Arab world right now, the need for change in those states has never been voiced more strongly by those from within, and as a result the conditions of those states have never been more obvious to those around the world who are watching.  There are many more cultures who have yet to go through that process, or even be close to voicing their oppositions.  To those individuals in the worst trouble I extend a welcoming hand.  Similarly, any who wish to come here as a means to seeking to better themselves, so they may gain skills for use either here or in their home countries are also welcome.  Those who wish to come here so they can enjoy a state-funded life of relative luxury on our taxes, or seek to use our system to establish a base from which to further their many and varied international crime syndicates are extremely unwelcome.  They don’t have any more right to do that than we do to employ a foreign workforce exclusively to take care of matters of real life which we might want to conveniently ignore – don’t you fear growing old one day to think that people will just want you out of the way?

For many people, and I include myself in this, the whole situation is really simple.  Poor management and the acquisition of political favours and/or money can be virtually the only factors that enable such unjustifiable practices to continue unchallenged.  If a framework of reason and common sense is in place when handling immigration then there is every reason in the world to anticipate the general population becoming more moderate in their feelings about immigration, as seems to be the case in other countries (subject to the report statistics being accurate).  This would undoubtedly help in matters of social integration where the immigrant feels welcome enough to integrate, and we as receivers are happy to befriend.  I say this without any need to resort to political correctness or socialism in the slightest.  There is nothing wrong with basic fundamental kindness for a fellow human.  I shall leave the last quote of the blog to Craig Kennedy, President of the German Marshall Fund (an American based body who are focussed on bridging U.S.–European differences on foreign policy, economics, immigration and the environment, and who funded the report):

GMF Fund president Craig Kennedy said the survey was a "wake-up" call for governments.  "The survey shows that North Americans and Europeans have strong opinions about immigration policy, what works, and what doesn't.. but the survey also shows that the more one is exposed to immigrants, the more one feels positively toward them.”

Maybe it’s just me and my willingness to accept anyone who is reasonable, but I have to say that this is how I choose to conduct my day to day affairs.  To me it matters not which culture someone belongs to.  I work with a muslim guy - he's great.  I have an east Asian girlfriend - she's wonderful.  I take people on their individual merit, and if that ‘someone’ is reasonable then I will give them so much more of my time than if they’re belligerent, immoral and arrogant.  With a simplified system of immigration (and indeed, a simplified law) there is no reason to think that any situation should be insurmountable.  To my mind, what we need to do is stop introducing more 'measures'.  Whilst it may logically create a framework for a theoretically consistent system, it  leaves no room for the human heart or individual consideration.  Maybe spending enough time on the web has opened me to the point that I see the world rather than states and countries these days.  In fact I know I do.  I can say with conviction that without us taking the time to be human, without us using common sense, and allowing the rules to make our decisions for us, the system will fail almost everyone in some way each time – whether it’s the poor soul who becomes a victim of that system, thereby depriving us of the riches of their individuality, or the individual who abuses the system and brings us all down.

Peace

Predictive Text

The last few days in Egypt have been nothing short of remarkable.  In a stunning display of virtual coordination everyone seemed to turn out en masse to decry the iron rule of their leader Hosni Mubarak.  However, no sooner have we seen an apparent stand for democracy than we see a nation squander that momentum in what appears to be their first short-sighted disagreement, and I have to wonder where this is heading.  The last thing we all need is another civil war.

Until Mubarak spoke on national TV everyone was pulling together to depose their leader.  Then someone decided it would be a good idea for him to say a word or two.  In hindsight I suspect this was about the only way he could have salvaged anything for himself, and to be honest he wasn’t exactly quick out of the starting box to speak out in his own defence, which makes the sceptic in me think he was given too much time to consider his situation.  I like to give anyone the benefit of the doubt, but the same sceptic believes that Mubarak saw the way the wind was blowing and declared his wish to see his term through to September, knowing full well the divisive consequences it would have.  If he had a shred of decency in him he would have spoken quickly or quietly left as he was asked to.  Instead he was allowed to express his patriotism, and now we have two factions on the street – those who still maintain he should go immediately and those who are willing to let him see his term in office through, and once more the world has to witness brother fighting against brother.  This may all just be the ancient tactic of divide and conquer, to be used against an implacable and vast enemy.  If so, we may yet see the public decimated in their resistance and forced to concede comfort back into the old regime once more.  In my opinion I think this is exactly what he may be counting on, regardless of whether he really intended to concede office in September or not.  All in all this may not have been the turning point it appeared to be.

As for the in-fighting.. Well, for sure everyone has the right to an opinion and freedom of expression – this is what they were demonstrating for in the first place – but is this how they choose to demonstrate their dream of democracy to the world?  Are we to take it that nothing has been learned?  Barack Obama stated quite concisely that they would operate a policy of non-interference, but that assistance in any transition would be given willingly.  I worry that this is all going to end in tears.  Always with any power comes responsibility, and this is exactly what the world didn’t need to see happen.  In the beginning it was a precarious time for all Egyptians.  Now, this very moment that I write this it could be the prelude to a far more dangerous situation than their pre-revolution state.  I shall be watching this space with great interest.

The Power of Love

Before this blog header starts you thinking of Huey Lewis, Jennifer Rush, Celine Dion or Frankie relaxing in Hollywood, cast your minds back a few years..  Do you remember those poster tube packs you used to get with a set of Berol colouring pens?  As I approach 40 years of age I’m reflecting on the fact that my life seems to be like one of those posters.  Whilst it has been, and continues to be, fun to spend the time colouring and personalising it with all the correct and/or whacky colours of experience and philosophical rumination, in the end I’ll still end with a picture which looks more or less the same as everyone else’s.  However, sometimes something extraordinary might happen in your life and one thing you can guarantee is that it will take you down a path strewn with obstacles determined to make things more challenging..

As I write I’m looking forwards yet again to April.  You’ll recall in my last adventure things didn’t work out too well (for those of you reading this with a masochistic desire to dabble with empathy, see my blog entitled “How Far Will You Go? Pt2” from April 2010).  Ten months later and I’m taking another leap of faith, to reach the hand of a beautiful and loving Filipina with whom I now share my days - albeit virtually and with a significant distance between us.  We are getting together soon to explore the relationship we have nurtured, and intend to spend two blissful weeks bonding.  From where I sit writing now, I hope we will be together on a more permanent basis very soon.  Of course, no good deed or spell of happiness goes unpunished, and our romance is no exception.  Once more the incontinent buffalo of politics steams through the world, dropping manifestos, pledges and regulations aplenty, forcing us to jump through ridiculous hoops just to enjoy the basic freedom of togetherness which most couples take for granted.  As a very important part of our bonding I would love for my Filipina to be able to experience the UK sooner rather than later, but again it falls to me to do all the travelling and it is with notable irony to me that she must make an equal leap of faith in return, as you will see..

Did you know that Filipinos can’t take a holiday abroad to most of the world (if they can afford it) without a visitor’s visa, which in roughly 80% of cases is declined?  It will likely be because of a lack of proof that the person in question can support themselves financially whilst on said holiday, or proof that they will actually return at all!  Think about that for a moment.  You are subjected to numerous checks and searches before they let you willingly place body and soul into a fragile, pressurised container, to be carried to unfathomable heights perilously close to the edge of a vacuous infinity, but when was the last time the UK Border Agency automatically doubted you would return from your holiday?  Perhaps they plant a transmitter in your luggage or your shoes when they check for C4, just in case?  Irony strikes again to think that the Philippines national wealth relies pretty substantially on the income of off-shore workers (OFW’s) and yet they go to vast lengths to impose restrictions in case said traveller abandons their families.. or are the Filipino officials finally prepared to admit that their country needs some work on its political and social infrastructure?  Maybe I’m completely wrong.  Is it the fault of the rest of the world for imposing unreasonable demands as part of their politically/culturally negotiated travel requirements? 

It gets worse.

I can only speak for the UK, but after the ‘powers that be’ realised they’d left the barn door open they changed the rules governing immigration, and fitted a bureaucratic EU shaped ‘catflap’, thereby simply making the situation even harder for genuine non-EU applicants.  If my girlfriend and I are to come together “by the book”, then here is the scenario.  With hindsight we’ve discussed options and to have her living with me here in the UK is realistically the best option, so we have to prove we have a real relationship in order for her to qualify for a spouse visa (emails, tickets, anything and everything which can be mustered).  IF she is granted a spouse visa (at considerable expense) then we have leave for her to come here where we would have to be married within six months or else she’ll be sent off packing.  Assuming this blessed union takes place (under the banner of true love of course and not as a matter of political expediency which they are enforcing here) then we would need to apply for an 18 month extension to her visa, during which time she needs to apply for and successfully pass the “Life in the UK” test, to prove her worthiness to be a UK citizen.  All indigenous UK residents I know who have taken the online sample test have failed it.  I’ve failed it on several occasions.  If she passes she can apply for indefinite leave to remain.. if she fails then she can again expect to be shipped off home even though we’re now officially married in the eyes of everyone from ourselves, family and friends, down to the bean counters.

I suspect there are far too many couples in ‘separated marriages’ because of such heartless, statistical, quota-satisfying lunacy.  I appreciate that from one perspective this type of legislation creates a legal pause for ‘certainty of commitment’ between couples, but to be honest I really don’t think two people investing so much into a relationship such as this need any legislation to remind them of the rudimentary aspects of their romance.  To my mind Long distance relationships even have some advantages to them.  It removes the usual bed-hopping which takes place in early western courtships, and encourages the mutual core of loving feelings to surface better than a £1,000,000 worth of counselling, but even with as much love as we possess it does take a very real emotional toll, without all the residual political crap listed above.  All of this is yet another example of how the power of the internet is making it easier to meet and greet in the real world, effectively outrunning (or should that be ‘circumventing’?) the older, more pedestrian political machinations.  Indeed the “Life in the UK” test is probably as good an example of a political band-aid if ever there was one.  How can a test designed to filter those suitable and worthy for UK residency ask anything which can place both myself and my British friends into a category fit for deportation?  What about all the many other complications and misunderstandings which must happen between cultures through these gears of ineptitude?  If politicians haven’t completely given up on endearing themselves to their constituents and they feel inclined to think about the title of this blog, then maybe they ought to consider working ever more feverish towards positive political ties, rather than indulging in the kinds of arrogant political one-upmanship we seem to relive time and again.. puerile games for which in so many ways I haven’t even touched upon here, we may all pay a price worse than a couple of visas.

I’m sorry if it’s a cliché but the bottom line for me is that all the money, bombastic behaviour, and pomp and circumstance isn’t important.

People matter.  Love matters.

Peace.