Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category
Processed meat and health link – a red herring?
Comments (1)
Notwithstanding the intended pun, there is one aspect of this debate I had not thought about. So, last Thursday, we witnessed the publication of a Europe-wide survey highlighting the dangers of processed meat. In fact, we should not eat more than 20g per day, it seems. But Tim Lang, professor of food policy at City University London, noted on The Today Programme on Radio Four (7 March), that processed food is a direct consequence of the production of fresh meat, or at least the over production of beef, lamb, pork and indeed, chicken. The industry is so ‘efficient’ that it processes the less prime pieces to maximise the value of any animal carcass. The consequence of this, however, is the ubiquity of processed food, and its relative cheapness.
The debate on the Today Programme can be heard here: Lang on Today
For anyone interested in the work of Tim Lang, The Guardian newspaper offers the following: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2007/mar/25/foodanddrink.features5; his university profile can be found here: http://www.city.ac.uk/arts-social-sciences/academic-staff-profiles/professor-tim-lang
Horsemeat
The discovery of horsemeat in ‘value’ burgers in UK supermarkets comes as no surprise. Whether the ‘mafia’ – as alleged by yesterday’s Guardian newspaper – is at the root of it, who knows? And any debate about whether the British have a problem with eating horses is a red-herring. The safety concerns are, of course, a factor. The content of manufactured food is supposed to be traceable. Clearly the inclusion of horse renders the contents far from traceable. Rather amusing really. Though the question is, what type of horse has been included. I do not mean the difference between a pony and a cart horse. I do mean the difference between one full of drugs or disease – or both – that should not be in the food chain and those that are not.
Rather, the issue is about price. Animal protein is expensive to produce. Using traceable meat particularly so, even if it is mechanically re-configured, or whatever they call it. The pressure on food producers is to cut costs in order to produce – for many people – affordable meat products. The pressure often comes from the supermarkets – and it is no surprise that it is the discounters and those offering ‘value’ level products particularly affected here. That said, there is no evidence so far that ‘premium’ products are not also contaminated.
Maybe this is just a critique of global capital. There are so many non-UK subcontractors in this story, one can see how messed up is the food industry. The eventual supply has been traced to Romania (via Cyprus and the Netherlands and France). Why Romania? Arguably, there are still many working horses there. Perhaps more importantly, the cuts in funding for trading standards departments in local authorities has reduced the detection capabilities.
I do not eat meat, but I do often cook from scratch – beans, vegetables and fruits. It takes time to prepare and cook, but I am pretty sure it is cheaper than cooking with meat.
Picture source: Wikipedia (Waugsberg)
Gerald Scarfe cartoon
So, Rupert Murdoch has apologised for the publication of an offensive cartoon in the Sunday Times. The topic is Israel’s relations with its neighbours and the wall it is building in order to keep them out. “Good fences make good neighbours” as the poet Robert Frost wrote.
The cartoon depicts Benjamin Netanyahu building the wall himself – the mortar is red and what looks like some Palestinians have been built into the wall. I am not going to post the cartoon – readers can see it for themselves here: http://fromthetopcom.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/gerald-scarfe-cements-hate-on-holocaust.html
The Today programme on Radio 4 this morning pitted cartoonist Steve Bell of the Guardian against Stephen Pollard of the Jewish Chronicle debating – of sorts – the issue. Quite heated in places. Listen here.
The question is, are we talking about Jews – and hence being anti-semitic – or are we talking about Israel and the Israeli government? At the very least, when a country defines itself coterminous with a race, the depiction of a key player in the story – in this case Netanyahu – can be seen as an attack on the race more generally. On Holocaust Memorial Day, particularly so.
Update: 1 February 2013 – Media Lens has now evaluated this case. The assessment is at the following address. http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/alerts-2013/717-cartoon-politics-rupert-murdoch-the-pro-israel-lobby-and-israel-s-crimes.html
David Cameron’s speech on Europe
Long anticipated and it did not disappoint. It takes a lot to be criticised by former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, but Cameron has elicited a damning response.
“I think it’s a huge worry in circumstances where you put on the agenda the prospect of Britain leaving. Why would we do that? We don’t yet know what we are proposing, or what we can get negotiated. We don’t yet know what the rest of Europe is going to propose. This referendum will happen in four or five years time, if the Conservatives were re-elected. Why not wait and see what we actually get out of this, play our part in shaping the new Europe, but why be in the situation where now you are putting on the table the prospect, four or five years time, of Britain leaving so that we can no longer answer the question, when we are negotiating, is Britain going to stay a member of the European Union or not? We can’t answer that question any more.” (drawn from Andrew Sparrow’s Guardian blog).
Let us unpick that. We – and anyone who trades with us or invests in the country – no longer know if the UK will stay in the European Union. Should the Conservatives win the next election, that will represent at least 5 years or so of uncertainty. It will precipitate the end of the Union between England and Scotland, putting back on track the campaign north of the border to break free, even though an independent Scotland would need to reapply for membership to the EU (until now a disincentive to break free).
Why is David Cameron such a poor strategist? Even though many in his party – and many outside – loathe the EU, the EU remains the largest trading bloc for the UK. That is strategically significant.It is also the case, that a lot of what these people dislike are good things like the working time directive; 48 hours per day is long enough for anyone to work per week. There is a lot that is wrong, but Cameron has now dug in even deeper and diminished the UK’s influence over what is wrong. Not only will the UK not support efforts in Europe to support the Euro (see post: https://weiterzugehen.net/2011/12/10/26-to-1/), but now we are effectively leaving. On that basis, why negotiate with the UK? Moreover, as Blair said in his response, threaten to leave and someone will say “go on then”.
I had to laugh (though it was a painful speech to listen to) when he said that transport metaphors should be dispensed with – cast into some waste bin, only to serve up a platter full of them himself as he ‘progressed’. Astonishing.
Hunting with hounds – get used to being prosecuted
Boxing day brings the fox hunters out in their pantomime clothes and claims of victimhood. It is true it took an awful lot of parliamentary time to get this long-overdue piece of legislation in place. There is a solid majority in the parliament and country in favour of it. It is right. Simple. Get used to it. It does not outlaw the fancy dress and dog walking.
The tactics of the landed class to overturn it, however, are evident. Just before Christmas that most traditional and conservative of animal protection bodies, the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals, came under intense criticism for having committed £300,000 to convict two hunters from the Prime Minister’s local hunt, the Heythrop Hunt. Scadalaously, the loudest voice was the judge at the case. Will the Law Society or whoever regulates these people step in? I doubt it.
Going to law, however, was a no-brainer. An organisation committed to animal protection and the prevention of cruelty (it is in the name) with evidence of intended cruelty against animals legislated against in law, should see those responsible in the dock. And convicted. The State was not bold enough to do it.
Picture source: Michael Gwyther-Jones, Wikipedia
You’ve been Trumped
I’ve just watched this documentary in amazement. The corruption story is contemptible. Trump is building a golf resort on the East Coast of Scotland south of Aberdeen. Planning permission was originally rejected by the council – not least because the plan involved the destruction of a unique habitat with SSI (site of special scientific interest) status. The decision was called in by the Scottish Government, led by Alex Salmond, and overturned.
However, there are good people in Trump’s way. Local people whose houses, for Trump, are unwelcome features in the landscape. It is the story of how they have resisted and how the forces of the state have facilitated Trump against the locals. There is an extraordinary scene where the police manhandle the amiable journalist, handcuff him, and bundle him off to the police station in Aberdeen. But that is nothing against the despicable acts being perpetrated against the locals. Their water was cut off and not restored. There is footage of the electricity supply being cut by a digger; and the locals being billed for fences that they did not ask for or need.
Please watch.
Bigot of the year
Stonewall, the gay rights campaigning group, it seems, risks losing valuable sponsorship from Barclays and Coutts banks. The two banks have threated to withdraw support if Stonewall runs its bigot of the year award again in 2013. Both banks are concerned about being associated with the award after it was given to Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland at its annual ceremony last week. A deserved winner. Notwithstanding the bigotry, any award that two ethically-challenged banks struggle with must be hitting the mark.
O’Brien won decisively, reported the Guardian newspaper, “after describing gay marriage as a ‘grotesque subversion’ of the traditions of marriage and likened it to slavery. The cardinal called it an ‘aberration’ and claimed it might clear the way for polygamous marriages and would cause ‘further degeneration of society into immorality’.
That strikes me as being spoken by a true bigot. Pure folly as well.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/02/stonewall-unrepentant-cardinal-bigot-award?INTCMP=SRCH
Using the B word
Bigots. Nick Clegg nearly used the word – but pulled back when he was challenged by the former Arch Bishop of Canterbury, George Carey, amongst others. Now I use it in connection with the case of Michael Black and John Morgan who won their case against the bigotted Christian Bed and Breakfast owner, Susanne Wilkinson, who refused them a room.
Backed by the Christian Legal Centre, Susanne Wilkinson spuriously defended her bigotry. But now we learn that it was not their homosexuality that was the issue, but rather that they were not married. Jonathan Overrend on Radio 5 Live on Thursday evening (18 October) failed to follow through on that. It is laughable to suggest that any hotel – even her unwelcoming microbusiness – would contemplate turning away a heterosexual couple in a similar situation. And what’s more, if such is true and Susanne Wilkinson’s wish, she really does have to ask if she is in the right business.
I trust she has a reservation taken for Nick Griffin?
Has it been a good week for women?
The news regarding one of the UK’s most loved celebrities, Jimmy Savile, has not been good. It is not so much what he did – bad though that seems to have been – more that it was allowed to go on even though many people were aware of it. The fact that a BBC Newsnight report seems to have been ‘supressed’ in favour of a Savile eulogy adds to the sense of cover up. It took ITV to run with it.
The consequences have been monumental. Existing female presenters on the BBC have now come out and told of their own experiences with other male ‘colleagues’; for example, Liz Kershaw, formally of Radio 1 – Savile’s former station, told how she was groped whilst on air in the late 1980s and being accused of lesbianism when she complained. Sandy Toksvig made similar claims live on television. Finally, it seems, it is safe to tell the truth.
Talking of which, Julia Gillard, the Australian Prime Minister, had the House of Representatives utterly dumbfounded by
Julia Gillard (source: MystifyMe Concert Photography (Troy), Wikipedia
her 15 minute ‘home truths’ session in a debate on misogyny. Her speech opened with the following: “The Leader of the Opposition says that people who hold sexist views and who are misogynists are not appropriate for high office. Well I hope the Leader of the Opposition has got a piece of paper and he is writing out his resignation. Because if he wants to know what misogyny looks like in modern Australia, he doesn’t need a motion in the House of Representatives, he needs a mirror.”
The Savile abuse revelations can never add up to a good week for women; though having it out in the open and engendering some unease amongst the still-living abusers in the BBC and elsewhere is inherently good. Julia Gillard’s contribution, on the other hand, is empowering. It may have been entertaining at one level, but her ability to demonstrate to so-called colleagues that their behaviour towards her is at the very least bullying was striking. She has stood up to them on her terms. I cannot recall any similar events or instances.
I think we should invite her to do the same in the UK – starting with David Cameron and his “calm down, dear” put down to Angela Eagle MP in April 2011. One of the reasons that the Conservative Party is so nasty is because of its inherent mysogyny.
Full transcript of Gillard’s speech can be found here: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/transcript-of-julia-gillards-speech-20121010-27c36.html#ixzz29H8MJ4Hl
The nonsense that is badger culling in England
Source: BadgerHero, wikipedia
The long-fought for badger cull in England is about to start. The plan is to kill – systematically – 100,000 badgers; one third to the UK population. That, to reduce the infection of cattle by 15-20 per cent – not even to eradicate it.
Now the case against the cull has reached a new high with a number of eminent scientists at last speaking out. Lord John Krebs: “The scientific case is as clear as it can be: this cull is not the answer to TB in cattle. The government is cherry-picking bits of data to support its case.”; Lord Robert May, a former government chief scientist and president of the Royal Society, said: “I have no sympathy with the decision. They are transmuting evidence-based policy into policy-based evidence”; and the current government chief scientist, Professor Sir John Beddington, said: “I continue to engage with Defra [the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] on the evidence base concerning the development of bovine TB policy. I am content that the evidence base, including uncertainties and evidence gaps, has been communicated effectively to ministers.”
Not surprisingly, David Cameron, the UK Prime Minister, is quoted as saying: “I believe this is the right policy for healthy badgers as well as healthy cattle.” Even though, according to Professor Rosie Woodroffe of the Zoological Society of London “…all the evidence shows that culling badgers increases the proportion of badgers that have TB”. Dead badgers are always healthy.
So what is going on? Farmers and landowners have always had a penchant for destroying the countryside and anything else in it that offers a hint of competition to their activities. Foxes and birds of prey are persecuted incessantly on this basis. There is nothing like a land-owner’s whim – backed by the National Farmers’ Union – to base policy. Why do they never look at their own husbandry practices? Mad Cow disease, for example, was the farmers’ own doing. Though, we, the taxpayer, and the cattle, ended up paying for it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/13/badger-cull-mindless
Be informed 