…else you are unable to watch in, if you get my meaning. But yes, Izzy Knowles, a fellow Moseley Forum member, emailed me with this today:

There has been a spate of theft of batteries from street Virgin Cable / TV boxes throughout South Birmingham. The one at Billesley Lane @ Dyott Road was raided a couple of nights ago.

The batteries are large and heavy so the thief will have used a vehicle. They may also be using duplicate keys to open the boxes.

If you see anyone working on a cable box not in Virgin uniform or using a vehicle that doesn’t have Virgin logo please report it to the police and/or note registration numbers and descriptions.

West Midlands Police 0345 1135000.

A little bizarre, but just be aware, TV lovers…

Categories: Community Power
Tags: community groups, crime, moseley, moseley forum

Be the first to comment »

John Newson from Balsall Heath is our Planet emailed these to the SusMo email address today – carvings on the side of St. Mary’s Church in Moseley. He said:

“The Green Man carvings are at the height of the lower roof, easily visible from the ground as you walk around the church. They will be Victorian like the rest of the church, but maybe based on medieval ones on the old church. They were maybe sending a message about the importance of the self renewing power of nature.”

Amazing to find new things on something we know so well. Does anyone have any more information on what the carvings might mean?

Update: fellow Labourite Tony Kennedy pointed me in the direction of this article, via the SusMo Facebook page. It has some good information on the links between the pagan symbolism of the Green Man and the church (in general).

Categories: Past Times
Tags: balsall heath is our planet, sustainable moseley

Be the first to comment »

My family was not one much involved in party politics, but one of my earliest memories of such things was my father remarking that he would be “voting Lib Dem to keep the Tories out”. Since 1992, this has proved a reasonably good system – Bath has returned Don Foster to his seat time and time again. I haven’t lived in Bath since 2002 – but my family still does, and some of my friends. They’re reasonably satisfied with Don Foster, as the election results would suggest. People roll their eyes a little at the fact that he doesn’t live in the constituency, but he has been OK.

But they’re cross now. I’m not going to try and predict how many people voted for Foster on merit, or name recognition, or simply because he’s not Tory – but that third group, a group which many of my friends and family fall into, feel cheated. I’m not here to argue how good a job or not Don Foster is doing – but many people feel as though they cast a decisive “not Tory” vote, won, and got Tory anyway.

One defence of first-past-the-post is that the system can’t be blamed for the fact that people vote tactically, as many did in Bath. After all, if the majority of people really did want another candidate, they’d get that candidate if they voted for them. But I just don’t think it’s that simple. If you are left-leaning and live in Bath, you know that every vote for Labour, or the Green Party, is one that would otherwise go to the Lib Dems if the first two weren’t in the picture. You also know enough about your fellow Bathonians to know how they have behaved in previous elections – it’s a Lib Dem/Tory marginal. You’re not a campaigner, you’re not a politico…you’re not a Conservative. You might prefer Labour, or the Greens – but you vote Lib Dem, because you’re not a Conservative.

A lot of the politicos I know who aren’t in favour of AV find this hard to understand – that is, caring more about what you aren’t than what you are. “Why would I vote for anyone other than Labour?”, they say, puzzled, failing to recognise that many, many people may see bits of themselves and their values in multiple candidates – and, powerfully, none of themselves in another, popular candidate.

And people do, everywhere. And the effects of not being able to express that under FPTP is self-fulfilling – if you’re never voting for what you want, and getting something that is never more than “acceptable” or “less bad”, then what you are (in voting terms) just doesn’t seem to matter. Of course, there are far greater issues that lead to political disillusionment – but the solution to this one is really quite easy, comparatively, and I’d like to get it out of the way.

So how would AV solve that? Well, it takes away that risk, if you like – that feeling that by voting with your heart and your values, you run the risk of losing something satisfactory to something wholly unsatisfactory. In Bath, you could vote Labour, or for the Green Party as your first preference, put your “safe choice” (in this case, the Lib Dems) as second or third preference, knowing that in the event that you are in a crazy minority, your “safe” vote will be redistributed.

I describe Bath because I know it well – but to me, saying #Yes2AV is saying yes to choice, yes to voting with your heart as well as your head, and yes to votes that matter – to you as well as to the election of your elected representatives.

Categories: Labour Regeneration, Parliament Regeneration
Tags: bath, don foster, electoral reform

Read 1 Comment »

This blog was originally posted on LabourList.

Loud whispers have been emerging from last night’s meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party, as MPs turned on deputy leader Harriet Harman for her strong public stance on Phil Woolas. Woolas was convicted of lying to voters during the campaign to retain his parliamentary seat of Oldham & Saddleworth. He has since reported his intention to seek a judicial review.

But Harman, speaking to Andrew Marr, made it clear that the outcome of the judicial review would make little difference to Woolas’ future in the Labour Party. “It is not part of Labour’s politics for somebody to be telling lies to get themselves elected,” she said, firmly. I would have gone further – it wasn’t just the lies, or even just the racial nature of those lies – but the cynical and calculated way he and his election team played on, and even enhanced, real racial tensions in their own community.

It would seem that Harriet’s words did not go down well with a number of Labour MPs. Joe Murphy, writing for the London Evening Standard, reported that these MPs were “angry that she virtually killed off Mr Woolas’ hopes of standing again for Labour in an interview over the weekend.” It has been pointed out that this is not exactly an endorsement for what Woolas did – rather, anger with Harriet for arriving at a decision on the party’s behalf before the judicial process was complete.

Speaking on behalf of people before you consult them is one thing, but does the stage of the judicial process really matter? When Woolas and his campaigning team put that leaflet together, they associated its message with the Labour Party and its values. That may well be legal (particularly if you succeed in changing the law to make it legal) – but that doesn’t mean it represents Labour, or that we have to accept it and move on. When someone uses racial tensions to gain votes, we owe it to our values and the values of people who voted for us to ensure that such practices do not occur.

That is why I agree with Harriet, judicial review or no. There is absolutely no doubt that Phil Woolas endorsed that leaflet, bearing that message, during the general election campaign. As such, he must be accountable for those actions.

I am forcibly reminded of the behaviour of certain individuals in the banking sector – they failed, but there were no real consequences to that. Now, they are back to their bad old ways, somehow endorsed by the taxpayer. Similarly, if there are not meaningful consequences to playing on racial tensions to win elections, then it will carry on happening – and our communities will foot the social bill.

So price up Labour’s values, defenders of Woolas – because that is what he is on the hook for. If he doesn’t pay, who should?

Categories: Labour Regeneration, Parliament Regeneration, Screaming Howlers
Tags: andrew marr, campaigning, community cohesion, harriet harman, judicial review, phil woolas, racial tension

Be the first to comment »