I'd just like to take a moment to explain why I've had to put Ranting Stan well on truly on the back burner for the time being, but, before I do, a big thank you for your messages of support.
Mrs Stan has had what is known as "a breakdown". It's not the first time that my lovely wife has gone through such a distressing period - indeed, she was quite honest and open about her mental health problems when I first met her. However, the last time she went through this was in 2001 and there were very clear causes for her breakdown - which I do not want to dwell on. On this occasion, though, it has come utterly out of the blue and there is no single thing which I can put my finger on and identify as the cause.
It's also the first time this has happened since the kids were old enough to appreciate what was happening and it has been extremely distressing and unsettling for them in particular. It's hard enough for me to cope with my wife becoming a virtual stranger to me as happens when Mrs Stan goes into one of these dark periods, but for the kids it is far far worse. Worse still is that we have no idea how long this will last or how to help Mrs Stan through this - all we can do is give her all our love and support while she comes to terms with whatever inner demons are troubling her - in 2001 it took 9 months to a year before Mrs Stan began to emerge from the cloud which enveloped her.
Obviously this means that I have a lot on my plate to deal with right now so I can not spend what little spare time I have attending to a blog - I have a demanding job and my wife and kids need me more than ever so I have to devote as much time as I can to their needs. I can't say when or even if I will come back to blogging, but it is my sincere hope that I can and do.
However, as others have said, family comes first.
Thank you to all the readers and commenters over the last few years. I hope to be back sometime - I just don't know when.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Sunday, July 04, 2010
A brief hiatus
Apologies for the lack of posting over the last few days. I'd like to say that things will improve soon, but this is not likely to be the case. Mrs Stan has been taken ill and this, combined with an increased workload at the office, means I have little time for anything other than my work, wife and children at the moment and this will remain the case for the forseeable future.
Friday, July 02, 2010
One man, two votes
We're supposedly set to learn the date of the referendum on voting reform - a date which every one seems to think is going to be May 5th next year. If anything is likely to put a strain on the coalition love-in then this might be it.
The Tories favour retaining the traditional first past the post system - a one man, one vote form of voting which is simple, transparent and reasonably quick. The Lib Dems favour a proportional system - preferably using a one man, multiple vote system which is complicated, wide open to abuse and fraud and takes ages to deliver a result.
Some people argue that listing your preferred candidates is still one man, one vote - but it isn't. It's a single ballot paper, but each person casts multiple votes on each ballot paper - so there is no way it can be considered as a one man, one vote system.
I've mentioned before that a PR system of voting will completely change the way we do politics in this country and will remove the historic link between constituent and MP. The thing people forget - more than ever following the last election and the "leaders debates" - is that we do not vote for a party or a "leader"; we vote for an individual to represent us at parliament.
Of course, many people just vote for the individual who represents the party they support most - and that is fine - but it still should not detract from the simple fact that by electing a person to represent us at parliament the first past the post system gives us a direct link to governance that a proportional system will not have.
No doubt I'll come back to this in the coming months, but I know I am fighting a losing battle. The media have decided they want voting reform and voting reform we will get. That's probably the most dis-spiriting thing about politics today - that we get what the media (and the broadcast media in particular) decide we will get and not a lot else.
This is why policy decisions are made by leaking possibilities to the media to see what their reaction will be - and why the budget, which used to be so secret that only the Chancellor and a few advisers knew what would be in it right up until he rose to his feet in the Commons, is now common knowledge for days and often weeks in advance.
The Tories favour retaining the traditional first past the post system - a one man, one vote form of voting which is simple, transparent and reasonably quick. The Lib Dems favour a proportional system - preferably using a one man, multiple vote system which is complicated, wide open to abuse and fraud and takes ages to deliver a result.
Some people argue that listing your preferred candidates is still one man, one vote - but it isn't. It's a single ballot paper, but each person casts multiple votes on each ballot paper - so there is no way it can be considered as a one man, one vote system.
I've mentioned before that a PR system of voting will completely change the way we do politics in this country and will remove the historic link between constituent and MP. The thing people forget - more than ever following the last election and the "leaders debates" - is that we do not vote for a party or a "leader"; we vote for an individual to represent us at parliament.
Of course, many people just vote for the individual who represents the party they support most - and that is fine - but it still should not detract from the simple fact that by electing a person to represent us at parliament the first past the post system gives us a direct link to governance that a proportional system will not have.
No doubt I'll come back to this in the coming months, but I know I am fighting a losing battle. The media have decided they want voting reform and voting reform we will get. That's probably the most dis-spiriting thing about politics today - that we get what the media (and the broadcast media in particular) decide we will get and not a lot else.
This is why policy decisions are made by leaking possibilities to the media to see what their reaction will be - and why the budget, which used to be so secret that only the Chancellor and a few advisers knew what would be in it right up until he rose to his feet in the Commons, is now common knowledge for days and often weeks in advance.
Thursday, July 01, 2010
A futile exercise
I understand the deputy head boy - sorry, Prime Minister - Nick Clegg, is setting up a web site to allow the people of Britain to tell him what laws we want to get rid of.
Why is he doing this? He knows full well that he has no intention of paying the slightest bit of attention to it unless the suggestions coincide with his own particular views - so why bother asking?
Let's say, for example, that millions of people asked for the smoking ban in pubs to be lifted - does anyone think he would do that? I don't.
On top of that, the vast majority of laws which have come into effect over the last decade or so originate from the EU and are passed without any debate, discussion or serious consideration by parliament. They're simply rubber stamped and that's it - because we are not permitted to refuse or repeal them. They are directives - i.e we are directed to introduce them by our political masters in Brussels.
So what would Clegg do about those if people said they wanted to get rid of them? Absolutely nothing - because he can not do anything.
The whole idea reminds me of my school days when the teachers - along with the sixth form prefects - would tell us how they wanted us lower forms (in both senses) to be "more involved" in school decisions. There would be huge enthusiasm for a couple of days, hundreds of suggestions and, at the end of it, the teachers would do what they wanted to do anyway.
Not only does Clegg look like a sixth form collaborator - sorry, prefect - he still behaves and thinks like one too.
Why is he doing this? He knows full well that he has no intention of paying the slightest bit of attention to it unless the suggestions coincide with his own particular views - so why bother asking?
Let's say, for example, that millions of people asked for the smoking ban in pubs to be lifted - does anyone think he would do that? I don't.
On top of that, the vast majority of laws which have come into effect over the last decade or so originate from the EU and are passed without any debate, discussion or serious consideration by parliament. They're simply rubber stamped and that's it - because we are not permitted to refuse or repeal them. They are directives - i.e we are directed to introduce them by our political masters in Brussels.
So what would Clegg do about those if people said they wanted to get rid of them? Absolutely nothing - because he can not do anything.
The whole idea reminds me of my school days when the teachers - along with the sixth form prefects - would tell us how they wanted us lower forms (in both senses) to be "more involved" in school decisions. There would be huge enthusiasm for a couple of days, hundreds of suggestions and, at the end of it, the teachers would do what they wanted to do anyway.
Not only does Clegg look like a sixth form collaborator - sorry, prefect - he still behaves and thinks like one too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)