Open letter to Chris Grayling

Dear Christopher Grayling,

I’ve just read this Telegraph article (can’t find strength to find the actual piece you wrote). Let me start by saying I disagree with the concept of unpaid work experience full stop. I would love to say that my work experience thus far has been paid, but it hasn’t. HMRC’s reluctance to sort this out – when they know which companies are doing it, when these companies are extremely easy to find out about, and when these companies don’t even pay expenses – is indicative of how very little consecutive governments over the last decade or so actually care about individuals. In fact, it’s telling that this neat little industry arrangement benefits huge corporations, and governments can retain their confidence.

I digress. I am against the “Workfare” scheme because it is not about improving the individual at all – it is about providing a source of free labour for organisations – at the expense of the taxpayer, no less! I am currently on Job Seeker’s Allowance and I have been tactfully informed that I “may as well” apply for any jobs going at the centre (ones with literally no connection to what I have done in the past, no connection to my degree, and of no use to me or my career) because I will be forced to take something that comes up in a few months, or I risk losing my benefits.

“Short term work experience placements lasting a few weeks are of immense value to young people looking to get a foothold on the job ladder”

They are rarely of value. I don’t see how working in Tesco stacking shelves – for which other members of staff are paid – is going to be of any use to me when I am looking for a job in journalism. Do you? Especially not when you consider that I have already worked for a large supermarket chain for over a year. I worked there when I was doing my A Levels. I later worked full-time for my local authority. I have worked. I have experience. I am the opposite of workshy, Mr Grayling, but having been to university – something all young people are now being funneled into regardless of suitability for their career needs or wishes – I have graduated and found the economy in a devastating state. I have worked for free in many, many places over the last 8 years, in pursuit of the career I want – but I just don’t think that working for Tesco in exchange for money which I already receive is reasonable or at all justifiable.

“The critics are job snobs. The Guardian newspaper publishes stories attacking big retailers for offering short-term unpaid work experience placements for young people. But that same Guardian newspaper advertises on its website – yes, you guessed it – short-term unpaid work experience placements for young people.”

It’s not snobbery. Nobody is against anyone working for Tesco – the issue is that they are unpaid, but also that they are mandatory and thousands of people nationwide are being forced into work experience schemes that are not relevant to their line of work. You must realise that these unpaid work experiences are hugely harmful:
a) these workfare people on JSA are performing a function that could be performed by another member of staff, therefore they are actively harming the job market and exacerbating already-dire unemployment rates by reducing the amount of paid work available.
b) in the time that these people are working unpaid, they cannot look for jobs that are actually in their line of work, so they are effectively breaking their own contract with the job centre to comply with what the job centre says.

The work experience you mentioned at the Guardian and BBC Newsnight is voluntary and undertaken on the basis that the individual knows from the start it is unpaid, but they will gain valuable experience that will help them in their career. The workfare scheme touted by the government is nothing of the sort. People are being forced into these situations because they have been told if they do not comply, then they will lose their benefits. Benefits that they have received because they need a subsidy to live as they cannot find work. Pulling the carpet out from under people and telling them that they chose to sit on the floor is hugely disingenuous and lying about it, or pretending to equate workfare with genuine work experience opportunities is an insult to any right-thinking person.

I am intrigued as to how you still feel, what with companies dropping out of the workfare scheme like flies, that this is still a reasonable situation to put unemployed people in – especially when the economy is in such an awful state. But please do let me know if you find someone else who agrees with you.

Yours faithfully,

@ThatSoph

The rise of fascism in the UK

There is a distinct change in the air of late. It is the anticipation that something big is around the corner. The last two years has brought about significant change in the world. The Arab Spring of 2011 and the continuation of the waves of protest across the world – to the UK, the US, Australia – these signs that ‘the people’ will not stand for it; that the proletariat will not be oppressed by the rich and the powerful anymore, are tangibly felt. Austerity packages are being handed out to unwilling populations across the western world – in Europe under the increasingly concerned watchful eye of the Germans, particularly. It is they, after all, who stand to lose the most.

Austerity, they say, will get us out of this mess. Tightening budgets will encourage economic growth. Trickle-down economics will redistribute wealth across the nation. Getting rid of health and safety ‘red tape’ is the solution to the problem of unemployment. It is assumed that the private sector will mop up the excess labour from the public sector – this has yet to happen.

Since when did giving more money to the rich ever have an effect on those very people it is supposed to help? It doesn’t.

Why would health and safety red tape be such a significant issue for employers when looking to employ people? A cynic would say this is a move to weaken the rights of employees, and give leeway to big business – to not only allow the status quo to continue unhampered, but to actively encourage the exploitation of the working classes.

We’re in a period of serious crisis. The Euro is wobbling and has an uncertain future. Capitalism seems to be on its last legs, as ‘the people’ demand that they come before profit. It is against this background of genuine crisis that change can – and will – happen. Revolutionary wannabes, who have waited for years for this moment, assume that the replacement to a failing capitalism is socialism, communism, or even perhaps just something “nicer”. This is naive and mistaken. While there is opportunity for change, the most likely outcome is fascism:

“The primary immediate effect of the crisis will not be the rise of a radical emancipatory politics, but rather the rise of racist populism, further wars, increased poverty in the poorest 3rd world countries, & greater divisions between the rich & the poor within all societies.” Slavoj Žižek, First As Tragedy, Then As Farce (2009)

The truth is, we all know that the things I outlined above are not effective problem-solvers – they won’t work, and they are likely, in fact, to lead to bigger problems. These solutions are not solutions, they are merely distractions from the real problems – puppet-show politics distracting us from the fact that we are slowly losing our rights. We are being distracted from the reality that we are heading somewhere much darker than we have been for a long, long time.

Diane Abbott was not wrong when she said that white people like to play ‘divide and rule’ – it may have been in reference to colonialist attitudes and tactics, but it is just as true, and just as relevant, today. We are being divided, sugary-rhetoric-coated austerity forced down our throats, and civil liberties eroded under our very noses.

Just look at the way that the disabled people in this country are being demonised – by both the supposed left and the right. That has had a measurable affect on public attitudes – the national charity Scope examined the rise in public abuse of disabled people last year. Look at the rhetoric around immigrants and jobs. No wonder we have seen a spate of racist attacks in recent times. On a tram, or in football matches. And those on JSA are being forced to work for free, under the ‘WorkFare’ scheme. This is only the beginning.

It is okay for us to support protests in other countries. This is noble. But when our own people revolt, we must criticise, suppress and use more extreme policing tactics. They are not so different after all, but the rhetoric changes when we are discussing issues in our own back yard. And we give ourselves permission to intervene in Libya – but not Bahrain or Syria, where similar or even worse atrocities are being committed. In years to come, Britain won’t be seen as the saviour of the world, but an active destroyer of it.

The ever-narrowing national political discourse is, obviously, exactly what Naomi Klein wrote about in her book Shock Doctrine. Where there is crisis, there is opportunity for positive change, but also a huge opportunity for the powerful to tighten the grip on those who are oppressed. The crisis is the shock, and the ‘medicine’ is the swallowing of austerity packages, the reduction of civil liberties in the name of ‘national security’ or ‘we are all in this together’ rhetoric, and the acceptance of extreme policies.

Historically, we know this happens. It is how Hitler came to power in Germany in the 30s. It is how anyone clever would seek to obtain and retain power. We know this. Why are we allowing it to happen again?

Capitalism is in crisis. Our collective response, spurred on by mainstream media and political rhetoric, is to shift further to the right. The US has already begun its transition, with the signing off of the NDAA. First it happens as tragedy. Then we allow it to happen again, and it is farce.

We are in the farcical stage. People are swallowing the bitter pill of injustice in the mistaken belief that “we’re all in it together”, that it is “necessary” and that it is a “worthwhile sacrifice”. With the people stunned into obedience, it is only a matter of time before fascism tightens its grip on the UK. I predict in the next year or two that we will see the following:

-       Removal of the right to protest, or more severe limitations to that right.

-       A rise in riots, similar to those across the UK in August 2010

-       More politically-motivated arrests

-       Removal of benefits unless working under WorkFare scheme

-       Crack-down on ‘benefit cheats’ to the extent where people are encouraged to grass up neighbours, family members etc

-       “Othering” of other strata of society. Divisions across class, particularly.

-       The loss of worker rights (‘red tape’ war)

-       National service for young people

We should keep in mind that this is an ongoing and slow process – fascism doesn’t take hold overnight. Perhaps not every move the coalition make is one worth shouting about. We need to pick and choose the ones that will lead to restrictions on personal freedoms. We need to shout about the Americans’ ability to detain anyone in the world for an indeterminable amount of time. We need to ask why we are trading our civil rights to ensure the survival of capitalism, because we shouldn’t allow this to happen.

The thing about the Lib Dems…

Is that they really don’t seem to have a point at all. They were voted in by younger generations, primarily on the basis of one policy. The tuition fee policy, where university tuition fees would be free. At best, economic illiteracy and at worst, a brazenly cynical ploy to get some claws into government – which they have so desperately wanted for years. In 2010 we saw what the real game was. The tuition fee policy was not only dropped in the coalition agreement (how long did that take them to figure out?) but the outcome was that tuition fees cap would in fact be tripled, to £9,000. The Lib Dems were the only political losers in this battle, as both Labour and the Conservatives refused to outline exactly what they would do with tuition fees… He set himself up for a fall, really. Ever since, Nick Clegg has served in the interests of the public as an unhappy human punching bag. Is anyone surprised?

Vince Cable, once someone who could be admired outside of the party; someone who seemed to know what he was doing, threw away most of that credibility when he unwittingly boasted to undercover reporters about his ability to bring Murdoch down. He said he could use the nuclear option and resign. Is this now the same over Cameron’s Europe veto? Cable commands a following within his own party, and I suppose that is where he is counting on having sway. Perhaps.

Both Clegg and Cable are reportedly furious that Cameron has left Britain isolated in the EU but I am really scratching my head about what they can do about it. They were supposedly going to bring Tory policies to the left. All that I have seen since May 2010 is more Tory policies going through. The DWP has been shaking up benefits to a ridiculous extent, demonising disabled people and the unemployed – and now want cancer patients to go through testing to prove they are unfit to work. I was going to go through more but I couldn’t even list them all – there are that many. Where have the Lib Dems been a balancing tool or even had any genuine influence over policies that are blue, through and through?

What does Nick Clegg even do, apart from whinge about being rightfully hated? What else does Cable do apart from secretly plot to bring empires crashing down, and the blurt it out to the nearest reporter, like a blundering old fool? They seem to have wasted a golden opportunity, and I really don’t think that the Lib Dems will survive the coalition as a unified party – nor do I think they stand a chance of ever being voted into government in the next 50 years. But do carry on, fellows. I’ll grab the popcorn.

The conundrum of democracy

Quick one related to stuff I’m talking about on Twitter. Just some stream-of-consciousness thoughts…

We’re in a representative democracy. We vote MPs in and they vote ‘on our behalf’ [Without going into too much detail I have issues with this anyway - do you vote for party? For personality? For their manifesto? Manifestos get ignored. Letters to MPs get ignored. How do they represent people, exactly?] and then … That’s that. We tick some boxes on one day and we’ve had our say for the next few years.

Interesting, then, that there should currently be a discussion about referendums on Twitter (hat tip to Louise Mensch MP who has been mildly irritating the last few days – though she raises a good debate) – we had the AV vote earlier in the year and that went catastrophically wrong. Not because I was in favour of AV and the vote came out against it. But more that it showed up how ridiculous the very notion of democracy is in the UK. The entire referendum made a mockery of it, and made us fools. Both campaigning groups used awful tactics to win votes, patronising and showing utter disdain for the population. Dying babies? It’s a change of voting system, not a death sentence. That made me lose all respect for anyone working on those campaigns. The British public are not stupid, they are not to be treated with disdain and it’s utterly shameful that both sides were allowed to use untruths as fact.

I’m a fan of direct democracy – I think more power should be given to people directly, not given to them on one day and then left in the hands of what is ultimately a bunch of rich people who don’t live in the real world or face real struggles. People whose past employment history would have very little beyond “Parliament”, who send their kids to schools that charge, and who then charge the tax payer for clearing out their moat. Sorry, but I don’t buy that that is a fair and just way to run a country.

But I have an issue with referendums too. What happened with the AV vote is exactly how not to do a referendum. For direct democracy to work, we need to ensure that information regarding the topic is impartial, balanced and factual. That means no emotive dying babies nonsense. No guff about boxers or racing. Pure unadulterated facts. People can then make up their own minds. I don’t want to say that people are stupid – because it’s not always a case of lacking intelligence, but lacking the information or the motivation to do their own research.

One last thing I have noticed. There is clearly a reluctance to go ahead with a referendum – any government worth its salt would happily give the plebs a referendum if it was guaranteed to go their way. Most people in Britain are anti-EU and want out. So who in the government is stalling? They must be pro-EU but they’re keeping awfully quiet – why? What is it they know that we don’t? I wish someone would just own up and explain…

Food bank demand increases

It should come as little surprise to anyone that jobcentres are sending claimants to food banks. A few months ago, when I was at University, I was producer on a radio news day, and whilst researching stories, I came across a tiny radio station on the coast that discussed increasing demand for food at food banks. I did a little research, and what I found out was shocking.

I had held back from discussing this on my blog, as I was sitting on the story for an economics journalist to use – though this could hardly have come at a worse time. As the Euro teeters on the brink of collapse, domestic stories such as these take a back-seat to more pressing issues. So this has been highly neglected in the press – I have seen a couple of articles talking about it but they haven’t really been picked up on social networks as fervently as the Independent’s article above. I am the least surprised – my only astonishment is that it has taken this long.

Food banks are charitable local organisations that people donate food and money to, and they provide emergency food for people who are in need. People are referred to food banks for specific reasons – benefit delays, low income, benefit cuts, homelessness, unemployment, domestic violence, refused crisis loans… There are other reasons – but those are the main ones. They are given enough food for three days – enough to tide them over until their next pay packet comes through, or enough for them to organise some other means of obtaining food.

So, roll back to May earlier this year. The Trussell Trust – which runs food banks in the UK – had just published a press release stating that in between May last year and May this year, there was a fifty percent increase in people going to food banks. Incredibly, at that point, they calculated they had been opening one new food bank a week in 2011, as demand increased. I spoke to the manager at Bournemouth food bank at the time, and she explained why there was such a huge increase at Bournemouth particularly:

“50% of the people we now give out to are (because of) benefit delays and benefit cuts. I think this is a direct result of what’s changing in the government and how they’re reassessing the whole system of benefits, and I think that’s why people are struggling… What we were doing in a month, we’re doing in a week.”

She had seen someone who had to wait 9 months for their benefits to come through. There was so much demand for food that there was barely any food on the shelves at the end of the week. The food bank had to spend donated money on buying extra food, and she described the situation as “touch and go”. This was four months ago, and I doubt the situation has changed – if anything it would have, I imagine, gotten worse. Cuts in the public sector have led to redundancies and therefore unemployment, and it is no secret that job centres across the country are struggling with the inundation of new claimants. The logical conclusion, then, is that for families where both parents (or one, in single-parent families) have been made redundant, they may genuinely struggle to afford food – especially if they are in the process of obtaining benefits of some kind.

I find the Independent’s report to be quite worrying. Firstly, it states, “from tomorrow” that people will be referred to food banks by job centres, as if this is new – I had assumed that this was already happening, and I’m not convinced this is the real story here. “It is the first time in living memory that hungry people will have been passed on to charities in this way.” The BBC wrote in 2008 of job centres giving out food vouchers to the unemployed. Unless there is some minor difference that I am missing, this isn’t the first time, and I was under the impression it was routine for those suffering from benefit delays.

Secondly, “a claimant will be limited to three consecutive referrals”. This means they will be limited to nine days. Is nine days enough, when you are living on the poverty line and you don’t know when you will next have money? Concerning, for sure. I would question the legitimacy of that claim, because I personally haven’t heard that at all – in fact, it seemed as though one person in Bournemouth was using the food bank for nine months, or, one must assume, used it more than three times during that time they were waiting for their benefits to come through.

If there is actually a nine day limit for people who need to go to food banks, this is appalling – and this is what we should be getting angry about.

It’d be nice if we could be more like Norway

In Norway, when loads of innocent people were killed by one man, the Norwegian Prime Minister said that the answer to violence was “more democracy and more openness”. In the UK, when riots happen… Something that doesn’t come anywhere near the tragedy of so many lost lives (though some lives were regrettably lost), our response is… At best, pitiful. At worst, dangerously reactionary. And lacking any semblance of democracy at all.

- The Prime Minister came back from his holiday and announced it was “completely wrong to say there is any justifiable causal link”, suggested the government may shut down social media if necessary, and said that water cannon were available at 24 hours notice. [Full text of speech here]

- Meanwhile Lib Dem MPs (who are in coalition with the Conservatives) warn about knee-jerk reactions.

- There have been ridiculous sentences. One person jailed for six months for stealing a £3.50 case of bottled water. Numerous people have been arrested for ‘inciting violence’ on Facebook. Here, here, and here. There are loads more stories. One lady was given five months for accepting a pair of shorts (she was asleep during the riots).

- The Mayor of London and the PM are at loggerheads over police cuts. Cameron has said he will stick with the cuts despite Boris asking for more police. Though, we have enough money to hire a “crime guru” from America that works in an area where 400 gangs are. So clearly not that efficient or good at his job?

- Police forces have been gloating over ridiculous sentences on social media.

- A well-known historian… (as in, dealing in history, not the present or the future – so I’m entirely bemused as to why he is now a talking head on current social issues) blamed rioting on ‘black culture’ and stokes the fires of racism at a time when community spirit and trust in fellow human beings is shaky at best.

Our collective response to the whole thing is farcical. Over the last few years the pillars of democracy; the things we balance our society on, have shown their cracks and dreadful weaknesses. Bankers screw over ordinary people, politicians fleece the public purse for all it’s got, and journalists illegally hack into phones for the next juicy story to sell to us.

Is it any bloody wonder the country is in a state, and people are rioting? The conditions are perfect for unrest – something which was noted long ago by myself and by others. When we protested against raising tuition fees and the removal of the EMA in November, we predicted this. And, young people predicted there would be riots at the end of July, as youth centres started closing.

What is needed is not short-term pet/vanity projects – we need long-lasting, genuine solutions, with the co-operation of the very people who are involved in rioting. We need to consult young people on this! We need to have a genuine conversation with those involved in looting and rioting and find out exactly why this happened (though this map of rioting laid over a map showing deprivation is a big clue).

In other words – in fact, to paraphrase Jens Stoltenberg, we need more democracy and transparency. Not more ignorance and high-horse speeches.

Job hunting blues

I’m putting my feelers out in the job market (in my case it’s journalism) and it’s thoroughly depressing. No one expects it to be easy. I am generally a realist and I know that these things don’t just happen – unless you are extremely lucky or have the right contacts (which is another issue altogether).

What is annoying me the most is the amount of internships that are sneaking in under the guise of being ‘graduate’ or ‘trainee’ jobs. They are distinctly not jobs or even remotely job-like. There are exceptions of course, and I know this is idealistic but jobs should:
1) Pay a living wage so people can pay their rent, bills, buy food, etc.
2) Make people feel valued and like they are part of something bigger and meaningful.
3) Make the most of individuals’ assets; knowledge, skills and personality.

Internships generally don’t pay. Interns are rarely thanked or appreciated. And interns are usually to be seen tucked away in the corner, making coffee and tea, lugging boxes around, painstakingly archiving 8 years’ worth of weekly newspapers that nobody will ever refer back to, or rehashing press releases. This is not always the case, but it usually is. If the interns are proactive and ask the right person, they might get lucky and be given the opportunity to work in other departments in the publication. They might be asked to write for the website, or source pictures, or help another journalist with research. They might get bored and chat to a member of staff who turns out to be the best contact they’ll ever have. But it’s not guaranteed that they will actually do anything worthwhile, or at all linked to what they want to do – and it’s this kind of manipulation that is a big issue. Yes, it looks great on your CV but what can you really say about it in an interview other than “I made tea for the editor”?

Internships are slave labour nicely wrapped up in this fallacy that if you work hard enough then you will get a job for your effort. This used to be the case – you could work somewhere for free for a fortnight and then perhaps get a job offer – but it isn’t anymore. Companies are using the current climate – and consequent desperation of those who are unemployed – to their advantage. They are the ones who win out in the end. They get the work done, and I’m not sure they much care who does it as long as it is someone who proves they are sufficiently desperate or interested enough to do whatever tasks are casually thrown their way. I have heard a lot of stories of interns being asked to do work which is entirely inappropriate – or even unsafe! – which was not agreed in the ad for the internship.

Another issue is that internships are rarely paid, and only occasionally do they even pay expenses. So interns end up out of pocket. This excludes an entire group of people who aren’t lucky enough to live in London (where most of these kinds of opportunities are), have parents who support them or… You know, have a money tree growing in their back garden.

I personally am fortunate enough to both live in London, and have parents who can support me financially until I am able to myself. I have already carried out a lot of work experience, and I realise I may have to do a lot more. But I feel truly sorry for those who have been totally excluded and prevented from these sorts of opportunities simply because they genuinely can’t afford the travel, accommodation, or perhaps even the time off work, to do the kind of work that is generally accepted as ‘the best way in’.

I am a realist, and I understand it’s difficult. I don’t expect the moon on a stick, straight after leaving university. But I wish that the system was fairer; that companies were forced to pay expenses at least; that there was a time limit to how long you could be forced to work for nothing; that there was a way of holding those companies that don’t comply with the law, to account – other than exposing them on blogs or in the media. I’ve come across a lot of internships today that are in the ‘graduates’ or ‘trainees’ section – and it’s utter poppycock.

Electoral Reform

There’s already a plethora of discussion around the AV referendum in May.  The No to AV campaigners are using ridiculous ultimatum adverts, and Yes to AV are using Nick Griffin as an argument to vote yes. I’ll leave it up to you to decide – but I think there are other ways in which we need reform too.

One of the main problems with elections is that there is such a low turnout. The last election in 2010 saw 65.1% turn out to vote – not a great number by any means, but the highest since 2001. It could be argued that low turnout is a threat to democracy – where everyone has their say. Why do people not vote? What should we be looking to do to increase it?

Why do I vote?

This is an odd one. I vote because I feel like it’s my responsibility as a citizen. I know that people have died for my right to vote in the past, and I know that people across the world are still fighting for their voting rights now. It’s the one ‘official’ opportunity that I see, for people to have a say in what goes on. Of course, you can protest – and that may have consequences later – but the only ‘acceptable’ way to genuinely, democratically engage with the government is to use your vote.

Why wouldn’t you vote..?

1. Apolitical people. British culture has been dumbing down for years – are people actually aware of political issues, or do they know to what extent politics affects their lives? A really great example of this recently was in Jamie Oliver’s Dream School, where Alistair Campbell – faced with a class full of apolitical youngsters – asked them what kind of things they worried about. They talked about immigration, unemployment and benefits, and realised that perhaps they weren’t so apolitical or apathetic after all!

2. Voting seems pointless. Some people consciously choose to not vote because they don’t feel that their vote means anything. Defeatist thinking, but also pretty logical under the current first-past-the-post system. It’s another string to the bow of the Yes to AV camp.

3. Politics is boring. Political issues are often complex and there may be little benefit from understanding them. Politicians are seen as out of touch, talking about a world which they aren’t really seen to inhabit.

How can we encourage people to vote?

1. Voting has to be seen as a worthwhile effort. People aren’t going to waste their time voting if they feel like their vote means nothing, they aren’t being heard, or that nothing will change regardless of who is in charge. (And they have good reasons for thinking so!)

2. Make politics easier to understand/get rid of the jargon. Politicians should be striving to make it easy for the electorate to understand how politics affects them, how the system works, and who will be best placed to help them. I sometimes think that the political system in this country was so designed to be completely alienating to the general populace; what people don’t understand, they can’t engage, argue or debate with.

3. Make it easier to engage with. Last year’s election saw the launch of several ‘vote matching’ quizzes, to match up parties to views. It saves people reading through manifesto’s and trying to gauge where they stand. And in America, even Facebook took on a great role in American elections, by reminding people to vote and informing them where they can go. Embedding politics within social media seems like a fantastic way to go. Will this happen in the UK in the future?

4. Make it lively. Meetings are boring. Watching debates in the House of Commons is tedious. We need a way to make political issues lively and interesting. 10 o clock live has tried to do that. Has it succeeded? I don’t know; I stopped watching after the first show. I’ve heard it’s getting better, but I think the problem with shows like this is that sometimes the important issues in politics are sacrificed in the quest for laughs. We need to find a balance.

5. Compulsory voting? A high turnout is guaranteed. I’m not an advocate, but it’s an idea.

6. Make it easier to actually vote. I suspect some people simply ‘can’t be bothered’ to go down to the polling station and vote. Is it so entirely unthinkable that in the future we will have the opportunity to vote online? Some people say it costs too much – perhaps I’m being naive but I fail to see how. Post people their details (like normal) with a ‘code’ that has to be scratched off – to validate that it’s them. Of course, there should still be opportunities for people to vote as we do currently, but additional methods should be investigated.

Do you vote? Why? What do you think would make a difference to voting turnout?

BBC Question Time (Drinking) Game Rules

Who doesn’t love BBC Question Time, I ask you? Crazy kids, that’s who! (If you want a non-drinking game, I suggest DimbleBingo)

Best played with gin. To declare you’re taking part in the Question Time drinking game, tweet the hashtag #QTDrinkingGame … And follow our account, @QTDrinkingGame

1 finger

1. Every time a panelist raises their voice above an acceptable level

2. Any time Dimbleby gives a panelist a time frame of less than 15 seconds to answer

3. Mass audience approval/disapproval

2 Fingers

4. Every time the camera pans across to a young woman strategically placed in the front row

5. “People misunderstand what we’re trying to do here” (or similar)

6. “We’re going to move on cos we’ll come to that question later on”

7. “The last government left us in this mess” (or similar)

3 Fingers

8. Whenever anyone in the coalition says “difficult decisions”

9. “We have time for just one more”

Buzz Words & Phrases! (All one shot each)

10. “Postcode lottery”

11. “Big Society”

12. “There is no mandate”

13. “Hard-working taxpayer”

14. “The key issue here”

15. “The main thing to remember”

16. “Can I just answer that?”

17. “There are actually two issues here”

18. “Answer the question!”

Down your drink when..

19. …An audience member starts blaming *insert minority here* for our problems

20. …An audience member says “It’s political correctness gone mad!” (Everyone in the room shout “MAD!” – last to do it has to down another)

21. …Dimbleby makes a joke

22. …Dimbleby says “Man in the back row…. sorry, woman” Or vice versa.

23. …Dimbleby says “I’m sorry, that’s all we’ve got time for this week”

Additions to the list welcomed. Tweet me!

Contributors so far: @mycrippledeagle, @kay_ran, @emma_in_edin, @alferis, @microwavedrama, @rattlecans, @danielnobody, @adamvanner, @Tanners77

BBC Question Time is on every Thursday at 10.35pm. Don’t have a TV? Watch it here (have to sign up) or here. Find out who is on the panel this week here. And to get the most out of it, I recommend you follow DIMBELBOT on Twitter.

PS Don’t forget to dance at the beginning. Dunno how to dance? Some inspiration. Oh, and use the hashtag #BBCQT!

How to Write Effectively to your MP

This post is inspired by a conversation I had with the lovely baby dragon Puffles. There’s a longer post here (with a sample letter about the cuts that people can send to their MP) and a PDF file explaining how to lobby here – but I thought I’d keep it short & sweet. Lots of people feel writing to your MP is ineffective. But many don’t know how to do it properly – or in a way that is likely to get a satisfactory result. Clarity and being specific are key.

1) Be polite throughout the letter

2) Establish that you are actually in their constituency – always include your address (also useful so you can get a response too..!)

3) State the concern you have. ie “I’m worried about the recent proposals to sell off forests”… If you can, state the name of the act, or the details of what it is you’re writing about, to make it clear exactly what is concerning you.

4) Relate it to yourself. How will this affect you? Why should the MP care? ie “I am a horse rider, I go to ___ forest every week and I am worried that if these proposals go through, I won’t be able to go into the forest.”

5) Keep it non-partisan. It’s important that political differences between your MP and you (if any) are left aside. At the end of the day, they are there to represent you, regardless of whether you voted them in, or whether you agree with them.

6) Ask for some kind of action. Advice, reassurance, or a representation to somebody higher. ie “Can you reassure me that this will not be the case?” or “Can you please put this forward to the Minister of ____”… That way, they know what’s expected of them and can respond appropriately.

Tools you can use to write to MPs

TheyWorkForYou.com – Find out what your local representatives are doing in Parliament
WriteToThem.com – Find and write an email to your MP