Tuesday, January 16, 2007Richmond and CO2 chargingWe read that Richmond Borough Council (which includes my part of Teddington) plan to increase resident parking charges for those evil folk who drive gas guzzling cars. I wanted to check a few things so have just written to Councillor Lourie. I thought I'd share the text with you... Dear Mr Lourie, I have read about the plans to charge higher resident parking fees for ‘4x4s and other gas guzzling cars’ with interest. I’m all for action on emissions. Indeed when I bought my 4x4, I made sure that it’s emissions were in line with most normal family saloons, same goes for its fuel economy and safety rating. I have off road parking so in my quiet corner of Teddington I actually won’t suffer from increased resident parking charges. That does not stop me being really worried about the basis for imposing these charges so I just wanted to check that you were going to be scrupulously fair about their imposition. Not being apprised with how you will determine which vehicles should be charged your proposed increases, I am assuming that what you will do is physically measure the CO2 output of every single car applying for a resident’s parking permit within the borough rather than just go by the manufacturer’s stated emissions. At the least, you will be asking that any vehicle requiring an MOT provides proper recent measurement of their current emissions status. As I’m sure you’re aware, poorly maintained cars, those that are simply a good number of years old, many vans, mini-buses, diesel vehicles old and new to name but a few, can emit CO2 far in excess of anything pumped out by many modern 4x4s. I know as a member of Richmond Council you will want to impose any rules and higher charges fairly and not discriminate on the basis of any popularist assumptions. Please confirm that will be the case and outline same for public consumption. Thursday, January 11, 2007Politician in 'family before career' shockI don't often post on political issues as you know but this just makes me seethe. Ruth Kelly, a Labour MP and Cabinet Minister, being lambasted for deciding to send her dyslexic son to a private school where he will get specialist help. Get out of her life and mind your own damned business. Here is what we know. We live in a capitalist democracy which provides many things to accommodate the financial situations of the members of our society. Given the funds, we are free to choose which of those we want. The Labour party is not against private schools. Ruth Kelly has the income to afford to send her son to a private school. Her other three children remain in the state system. Here is what we don't know. The severity of her son's dyslexia. Any other learning issues he has. What the professional advice was that she received concerning her son. Whether the local state schools actually can give him the help he needs whatever the quality of their services. Given these things, in which world is she a hypocrite? She is simply exercising her right to choose and she is not going against her government's ideology. But much more than that, she is doing what every responsible parent should want to do, and that is trying to get the best for her children. And for that she should be applauded. That attitude should not damage a career, it should enhance one. I know most people can't afford private education for their children. Unless my financial circumstances change, neither will I be able to. But I no more have the right to tell Ruth Kelly how to spend her money than she does me and mine. That's choice, that's freedom and that is our democracy, isn't it? My advice is, stop whining about the priveleges of others and try and better your own situation in whatever legal fashion you can. That's what I try to do. Good for you, Ruth Kelly. And good for your children. They have a mother who cares for them more than she does her career and that must make them feel bloody great. Friday, January 05, 2007BFS Prism ColumnThought I'd reprint my Prism columns here (I do have permission...). Prism is the magazine of the British Fantasy Society. And if you're interested in the society, why not join? Head over to www.britishfantasysociety.org.uk and find out more. Meanwhile, here's my first colulmn. Wrote it in October last year. Enjoy. Fantasy Musings – Prism Column, October 2006 On jealousy It is traditional, when the fantasy genre is brought to wider public attention for authors to nod appreciatively and say how happy they are that author ‘x’ has helped to further the cause of the genre in general, we will all benefit and the world is clearly a happier place, blah, blah. Now come on, all of you, admit it. Beneath this veneer you are seething with jealousy when such a thing happens. Take the following: ‘Peter Jackson has optioned Naomi Novik’s Temeraire.’ Was I jealous when I read that? Is the Pope a German? My teeth ground together and my temperature rose. Good grief, I dream of this and here it is happening to someone else. Oh, the unfairness of this world. Wail and howl! Why has Jackson not called me to explain that The Raven must be brought to the big screen? Can he not see what must surely be in front of his face? Frankly, James, no he can’t, so stop your whining. I congratulate Naomi Novik. She has conjured a superbly visual premise. But that doesn’t stop me having a few moments of insane jealousy. Personally, I didn’t get on with the writing style but I doubt she’ll lose any sleep over that. However, few of us could deny that, correctly rendered, Temeraire will be a feast for the eyes. The point is, what do you do with such jealousy? Well, there are two routes. Get bitter and spout about how undeserving it is that lesser talents (for such will be the insinuation) have achieved mighty riches (for such is the root of the bitterness). Or get over it and give yourself a great kick up the backside. Use it. Someone else has hijacked one of your dreams but the happy thing is that dreams, and not just nightmares, can recur. Make it you next time. Will it bring the fantasy genre to a wider audience as a result? Well, there is little evidence that The Lord Of The Rings did anything of the kind. I guess the encouraging thing is that film and TV makers are more and more accepting of fantasy. The scales may take a long time to tip but if the trend continues, an increase in interest is inevitable. Like prodding at a rock with your finger, eventually, you’ll make an indentation. On David Gemmell The undisputed master of heroic fantasy in the UK died on 28th July this year. The effect he had on fans was demonstrated in the outpouring of emotion and tribute seen, in particular, across the internet. For myself, there was personal sadness too. David was a good friend and a peerless mentor; a man I will miss very much in the years to come. But, like the tribute we held at FantasyCon in September, melancholy is outlawed from this column (unless I never hear from Peter Jackson of course and then it is entirely justified). David believed in the great strengths of humans and their capacity to defeat evil and save good. He reflected those strengths in his novels as well as in everything that he said. These are what I will remember going forward… love, friendship, honour, courage, redemption. A world that exhibits these cannot be all bad. He also told me once that while it was almost impossible to define ‘heroism’ so far as he was concerned, there was one thing he always bore in mind. And it was this: that when for all others, all hope is gone and despair and defeat are inevitable, for a hero, there is always something that can be done. Wise words. Until next time, do the best you can and be good to people. Nothing else really matters when you think about it. |
Archives
• February 2003 |
