Quotas

In their efforts to make society fairer the left came up with a few ideas, such as removing all competition from schools, multiculturalism, diversity and equality. They got it wrong of course mostly because they approached it in the socialist way. So they left us with failing schools, unfit pupils, no go areas in our cities, various pressure groups determined that they should be first among equals and generally destroying society from the inside out. Some might think that was their plan, but considering their competence I doubt it, more like an unexpected outcome.
However they're still at it as witness this article in the Telegraph.

Harriet Harman, Labour's acting leader, has called for half of the party's shadow cabinet to be made up of women. 

Miss Harman said she wanted the rules revised for shadow cabinet elections to make sure there was a 50-50 split between men and women.

''It's time for Labour women to step out of the shadows,'' she told the national conference of Unite in Manchester.
Miss Harman told delegates Labour now had 81 women MPs, more than all the other parties put together.
''Labour is the only party in parliament which speaks up for women in this country. We have some excellent experienced women and some brilliant new women MPs.
''We still do have twice as many men MPs as women. The Labour men are great - but they are not twice as good as the women.''
The acting leader said rebuilding and renewing Labour following the election defeat was an important task, stressing that the party must ''listen and learn''.
She continued: ''Our biggest loss of support was from hard-working families who, worried about housing and jobs, felt insecure and concerned about immigration.
''Now there is our chance to debate these issues throughout the party and through the contest for the next Labour leader.''

Now I know women outnumber men 51% of the population is female and I've no doubt that some of them would be very very good at running the country assuming they could be arsed of course. Politics does not seem to attract women in great numbers though, I suspect it's because they have more common sense than men. Yes they're prepared to vote to choose or remove incompetents from government via elections, but anyone who watches PM's question time and the various donkey noises going on in the background would soon be put off. However Harman is falling for the usual socialist bullshit in equating quotas as being fair. Most people understand fairness, however most people would want someone competent to run the country rather than someone who simply ticks all the boxes. New Labour were prime examples of that sort of failure, where dogma trumped ability every time.
So if Harman gets her way, 50% of the shadow cabinet will be women, they might be brilliant at it, I have my doubts though, it may just be that the whole thing is tokenism gone mad and that far better qualified or able people get passed over in the process simply for being the wrong gender, still it's a good way for Labour to store up future trouble for themselves so I guess I'm all for them doing it.

Those who seek quotas should remember that equality cuts both ways and that 50% of the population are actually below average intelligence.

More about → Quotas

No it wont work, it never has worked

NICE the acronym for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (EVIL would have been better) are doing their usual Quango bit to justify their position in killing off cancer patients and otherwise being a busybody in everyone's lives, if ever a Quango needed killing off it's these guys along with all the other health related fake charities too. It wouldn't be so bad if they just offered advice, however they don't, they interfere in peoples lives and make life just that bit more unliveable and unbearable when they do.

Times.

A minimum price for alcohol, advertising bans and more rigorous screening for problem drinkers must be introduced to curb the nation’s binge culture, the NHS treatment watchdog recommends today.
Guidance issued by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) says that a minimum price per unit is the most effective way of tackling excessive drinking and its impact on the NHS and society.
NICE also advises a complete ban on alcohol advertising and calls for better screening for drink problems among the general population. Patients should be asked about their drinking habits when they register with a GP, and professionals such as police and community workers should raise the issue if it is contributing to behavioural or other problems.
Scenarios include people who have a condition that may be linked to drinking, or could be made worse by it, those who have suffered a minor injury and patients who are advised about medication or sexual health.
The recommendations, compiled by a panel of public health experts, will add to pressure on politicians, who have previously shied away from a national minimum price despite calls from the Chief Medical Officer and Parliament’s health committee. While the guidance does not recommend a specific minimum price, its authors assessed the impact of a 50p per unit, which they said would tackle excessive drinking across socioeconomic groups and be of greatest benefit to the most vulnerable.
Professor Mike Kelly, NICE’s public health director, said studies suggested that it would cut consumption among moderate drinkers by 3.8 per cent and by 10.3 per cent for those drinking at hazardous levels.
A bottle of wine would cost at least £4.50, a pint of 4 per cent alcohol beer £1.14 and a 10-pack about £10. A two-litre bottle of cider would cost a minimum of about £7.50.

Ok, for one thing, these "experts" probably wouldn't notice a price hike, they'll be well paid and if they are smart (like me) buy in bulk from abroad. I don't mind buying stuff from pubs, but I do object to filling the UK governments coffers via alcohol duty. They also probably don't realise that its interference in peoples lives like this that drives them to drink or smoke or take drugs. Make someone's life a misery by constant  petty interference, regulations, high levels of taxation on fuel, food, booze and ciggy's. Make their mortgages high along with their council taxes, even their private rents. Make it almost impossible to get a job straight from school by dumbing down education. Force them to universities to take degrees in stuff employers don't want and make them take out loans to be paid back.
So yes we have a problem, but it's almost entirely of the states making and they tend to make it worse. Prohibition doesn't work and if you make the price so high that people can't afford it they'll use something else which usually means illegal drugs with no quality control and loss of life too.
My advice is leave us alone, give us an escape and we'll probably not riot and tear down the "Righteous State" carry on as you are and your days are numbered, even the Soviets realised that by keeping food and booze cheap people would put up with a great deal of shit from the state.
So, instead of trying to solve a problem by making it too expensive to do, try enforcing the law on drunk and disorderly behaviour. Have segregated drunk tanks in big towns and cities for people to dry up.

In fact (and here's a thought) try tackling those that have the problem rather than hitting those of us who don't in the pocket. Best option though is for the experts of NICE to just shut up and leave us alone.

More about → No it wont work, it never has worked

Bleating

David Laws is claiming that he has paid a high price for trying to keep his sexuality secret.

BBC.

David Laws has said he never sought to exploit the expenses system and had paid a "high price" for wanting to keep his sexuality private.

Mr Laws, who quit as Chief Secretary to the Treasury after disclosures about his expenses, said he should have been "more open" about his circumstances.
"I accept I should have set a better example as a public figure," he said in a statement to local media.
He said he hoped to remain as Yeovil MP, if his constituents backed him.
The Liberal Democrat resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, saying he did not feel he could continue with the "crucial work" of sorting out the nation's finances after it emerged that he claimed expenses to pay rent to his partner, James Lundie.
Under rules introduced in 2006, MPs are not allowed to lease accommodation from a partner.
Mr Laws had already apologised for a breach of the rules, referred himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner and agreed to repay £40,000.
Senior politicians from the coalition government have praised Mr Laws and said they hope he can return to office some time in the future.

He actually paid a very minor price for cheating the taxpayer, not for concealing his sexuality. We're I to misappropriate £40,000 from my employer I very much doubt I'd be demoted with a chance of promotion in my future. I suspect I'd be looking at the sack and criminal proceedings leading to a jail term of 1 to 4 years. Yes I've heard the arguments from some who say he could have claimed more if he'd declared his sexuality and got the second mortgage payments. I've heard the argument that even today his sexuality could have cost him his vocation and it's possibly true. However I also know he's a millionaire and could have quite easily just forgone this payment and kept his private life, well private. However it seems he chose to deceive friends, family and colleagues (although it appears to have been an open secret in the Westminster bubble) and then also chose to profit from this deception, to the tune of £40,000.

So, no David Laws, you didn't pay a high price for being gay, you cheated the taxpayer when you didn't need to, that makes you a thief, no matter your sexual preferences, you still have a job, you still have the pension and no doubt you still have access to the expenses.

I call it a damned disgrace.

More about → Bleating