Fracking is a classic reason why England needs Regional Devolution (Part Two)

As previously stated, I do declare myself to be softly in favour of fracking.  As we exit 2013 and move into 2014, it appears increasingly likely that the fracking debate will if anything, become more significant.  The Conservative led Coalition Government of David Cameron is making broadly pro-fracking noises, including tax breaks for fracking companies that set up in the UK.  This may all be very well in terms of meeting energy targets; but it may also threaten to divide communities who see their very futures controlled by commercial interests and Central Government policies with little or no consideration for the local environment.  The best regulatory answer is for devolved assemblies to be set up in the English regions to regulate.  The main point is that such regional assemblies will be able to take on board the positives of fracking in terms of job creation and economic growth, but would be less likely to ignore any consistent evidence of environmental harm.

The North West of England contains two of England's biggest Cities in Liverpool and Manchester.  There are also historic cities like Chester and Lancaster, in addition to fine coastal scenery on the Wirral Peninsula, the Sefton Coast (north of Liverpool), and the Fylde Peninsula in Lancashire.  The Lake District National Park is England's most visited National Park.  All these areas mentioned are central to the region's tourist industry.  If it ever were to be established that fracking is causing an environmental harm, that is having a knock on effect on visitor numbers to the North West, a regional administration would be much more passionate than David Cameron and George Osborne (Chancellor of the Exchequer) in looking to correct any adverse effects fracking may have for the region.

The Lake District is England's most visited National Park.

Across the Penines in Yorkshire, the similar act of balancing economic gains against environmental concern may be more tricky.  This is particularly so considering there are possible shale gas resources underneath North Yorkshire's two national parks, the Yorkshire Dales and the North Yorkshire Moors.  I can state from personal experience that some of the scenery in each national park is up there with England's finest.  The best means of balancing competing interests here surely needs greater input from Yorkshire lawmakers, not the Westminster village.

Goathland Station in the North Yorkshire Moors, has been used for filming in many television programmes and films, most famously in Harry Potter.

In the United States, the debate over regulating fracking at State level or at Federal level has intensified recently as the House of Representative passed a bill that prohibits the Department of the Interior to regulate on fracking in states that already have their own fracking regulations in place.  Whether this bill actually does become law is another matter, as the House of Representatives is only one legislative hurdle and President Obama is known to be in favour of tighter fracking rules at Federal level.  On the other side of the argument, supporters of state regulation argue that another level of regulation merely duplicates regulation and potentially may drive up costs to companies.

Back in the UK, some opponents of English devolution may well argue that in terms of geographical area size, England does not need devolution considering there are states in America which are bigger than England itself.  However, considering England is much more densely populated than the US, that argument certainly does not wash with me.  The devolution that has taken place in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland has opened up imbalances in the Union of the United Kingdom, in the sense that MPs from outside England have been able to vote on some English only matters, yet English MPs have been unable to vote on some non-English matters.

My belief is that fracking is an issue which needs to be regulated on a region to region basis, and that MPs with no geographical connection to a potential fracking region in question, are not being helpful in debating a regulation process for a location which would have few concerns for their own constituents.  I will hammer home this point again: IT IS TRUE THAT FRACKING AND IT'S POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS COULD BE BENEFICIAL TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES; IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT LOCAL COMMUNITIES WILL FEEL ANY ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM FRACKING!  It is for this reason that I believe English Regional Governments would be best placed to balance the benefits against the potential environmental costs of fracking.

How to Stop a Qatar World Cup farce from happening ever again!

Tomorrow will see the draw for next year's World Cup Finals.  For all the negative coverage we hear about Brazil's ability to deliver on building it's World Cup Stadia, Brazil is the world's most illustrious football nation.  Therefore the idea of a Brazillian World Cup is not particularly controversial on footballing grounds.  Now let's fast forward eight years to 2022.  This tournament will see a host nation with a very different pedigree- Qatar.  Whereas Brazil have qualified for every World Cup to date (not to mention being the five times World Champions), Qatar have never even qualified for a World Cup before.  Let's also not forget that Qatar won the bid on the basis of a summer World Cup.  Now that is apparently not going to happen!

For much of the criticism FIFA President Sepp Blatter has correctly endured, the idea of moving the World Cups around the continents was with some merit against a backdrop of evidence suggesting there were football powers emerging from both Africa and Asia.  For me, this Qatar episode has I'm afraid blown FIFA's whole credibility up in smoke.  For many people in the West, the idea of taking the World Cup to the Middle East was always going to be contentious on Human Rights grounds.  But whilst nations such as Saudi Arabia and Iran may both also carry much political baggage, they at least had some credibility of having appeared at previous World Cups.

We do from time to time hear of the need to get rid of Mr Blatter from some sections of the game.  To make sure this farce is never to be experienced by world football ever again, getting rid of this ridiculous specimen of a man is just the tip of the iceberg.  We must consider the reform of the World Cup itself to make it fit for purpose once again.  Do we even need to have a World Cup bidding process?  I have come to the view that we don't necessarily need this process of bidding for the right to hold the greatest football show on earth; a process could be introduced instead to reward success on the pitch as the way forward.

A very simple way of rewarding success on the pitch would be to allow the World Cup winner the honour of staging the next tournament.  Some critics would say Brazil would then have a platform for complete domination.  I would on balance share that concern.  One dimension of what enables the World Cup to capture the global imagination is the cultural variation of a different host nation.  For that reason I would not on balance favour a system of simply allowing the World Cup winner to continuously win the right to host a World Cup per se, especially if we have a cycle of a dominant winning nation.  I am not sure there would be the same level of global captivation if there was a cycle of nearly every World Cup being staged in Brazil or Germany for instance.

That said, going down that route would be better than the status quo which has proven to allow a football minnow to be awarded the honour of hosting the World Cup in what many people believe to be very dubious circumstances.  It should also be pointed out that the last time in which Brazil hosted the tournament in 1950, it was their near neighbours from Uruguay who came out on top (from a most unusual tournament format which saw the last four play in a final group rather than a knockout format).  However, Brazil's greatest teams which have produced the likes of Pele, Carlos Alberto, Zico, Socrates, Ronaldo etc have emerged of course in the years since they hosted the 1950 tournament.

I would personally favour a system of rewarding football success by first of all allowing the World Cup Winner the honour of being awarded the right to host the next World Cup, provided they have not hosted the event previously over a twenty year period.  The only other factors which could see a World Cup Winner not host the subsequent tournament are political instability, lack of suitable stadia, or the country in question simply deciding they do not wish to host the tournament.  Should a World Cup Winner not meet the criteria to host a subsequent tournament, I would propose to look first at the World Cup Runners-Up, then the Semi-Finalists, and then the Quarter-Finalists etc until a country is decided upon who has not been a host over the recent tournaments (and of course who is not seen as a pariah politically).

When it comes to choosing between the two semi-finalists or two or more quarter-finalists, the deciding factor could be a points table based on the teams' performances in that tournament.  In addition to the usual one point for a draw and three points for a win as in the group stage, knockout matches could merely reflect the result after ninety minutes for the purpose of such a performance table.  In an unlikely event that two teams who reach the same stage of a World Cup share an identical points and goal difference record, the two nations could have their World Cup record from the previous World Cup campaign (from four years ago) used as a deciding factor instead.

I recognise that some people may read this post and come to the conclusion that I am proposing a system that will stifle the ambition of some less illustrious footballing nations.  I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THAT!  I WILL GIVE FOUR REASONS WHY.  First of all, this system would mean a big hitter like Brazil, Germany, or Italy (like any other nation) can only host the World Cup once every twenty years at best.  Secondly, every World Cup since 1986 has seen an African Nation reach the knockout stages; although there is little doubt that Africa can perform better if off the field matters can be rooted out.  Thirdly, Mexico (from the CONCACAF Confederation) regularly make the World Cup knockout stages.  Fourthly, Asian Football has had plenty of highs in recent World Cup history: Australia, Saudi Arabia, Japan and South Korea have all reached the knockout stages at various stages over the last twenty years.  NOW THIS IS THE MAIN POINT: IT WOULD BLOCK A NATION WITH NO WORLD CUP PEDIGREE FROM EVER STAGING A WORLD CUP EVER AGAIN!

Fracking is a classic reason why England needs Regional Devolution (Part One)

Imagine the scene- walking down the high street, enjoying a bit of retail therapy when you get approached by some dude conducting a survey on Fracking of all things.  Despite emerging as a very divisive issue in recent years, there are still a fair number of people throughout the North West of England who are not aware of what fracking actually is.  An Opinion Poll conducted for a regional television news programme does illustrate this; also that more people in the region now support fracking than not.  This method of creating cracks in rocks to extract Gas has been used in parts of the United States for many years.  Now we have companies in the North West of England undertaking exploratory work to establish what potential lies this side of the pond.

On balance, I feel that fracking could be good for the local economy.  But I do say a silent yes in principle at this point, with a note of caution to take on board environmental concerns.  I am open minded that I could switch my viewpoint to the other side of the fence at any moment.  Regardless of what I think and may think in the future on fracking, what this issue does highlight is that English Regions do need to have stronger voices.  I expressed my viewpoint in my post on 1 November 2013 that regardless of the outcome of next year's referendum in Scotland on Independence, that England's interest would be better served by the introduction of Regional Assemblies and for the Westminster Parliament to be cut in numbers.

With Fracking, the potential benefits in terms of job creation will be local communities within the North West of England, or any other English region for that matter.  But on the downside, any negatives such as pollution and general environmental risk will also be most felt at a local level.  CONSEQUENTLY, IT DOES NOT MATTER IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DAVID CAMERON AND HIS CON-DEM COALITION OR AN ED MILLIBAND LED LABOUR GOVERNMENT.  A National Government sitting in London (which is too detached from the North West) is not best placed to balance the competing industrial and environmental interests; a Regional Administration would be better placed to be accountable for what is in almost every aspect, a more local issue.

Don't join the great Russell Brand vote boycott!

Russell Brand is no doubt a curious comedian who has been noted for more than the odd controversy down the years.  One latest controversy arose from Mr Brand's October stint as guest editor of a popular left leaning British political magazine.  Mr Brand talks about the need for a Revolution in consciousness and how we see the truth.  If you believe him, it could be that the Spiritual Revolution is now under way!  Is it really?

There can be no doubt that Russell Brand is very witty.  His notion that some of the planet's great religions are merely comparable to karate as great ideas, certainly tickled me.  As did his suggestion that shaking George Osborne's hand accidentally, was like sliding his hand into a dilated cow.  I do sincerely apologise incidentally at this point if I have offended anyone who is deeply religious.

Seriously though,  my interpretation of Russell Brand's spiritual revolution is that I just don't quite get him.  Brand makes some plausible points, but he also talks a lot of what I consider to be intellectual waffle as well.  Yes it is very concerning the power rich business people possess in today's Western World.  But the point he should make is that if any vested interest holds too much power then that is also worrying.  What I find particularly concerning is the point Brand makes that everyone should follow his example of staying away from polling stations.  I consider this viewpoint to be very worrying indeed!

Of course, many of us go through phases when we wonder if it is worth voting.  Many years ago, I did not cast my vote at a local election poll.  My recollection is that as I was so busy and pre-occupied with other stuff, I forgot the elections were even taking place.  In fact a few days later when I met up with some friends, I used another excuse along the lines of there being little point in casting a vote towards one political party with certain views against another party with similar views.  A very dear friend in fact gave me a right dressing down!  She was right.  The sacrifices which brave men and women have made to give present day Britons the right to vote, is a right that too many Britons take for granted.  I subsequently registered for a postal vote, and have voted in every General Election, European Election, and Local Authority Election ever since.  

As a Trade Union member I have always cast my vote whenever the Union has asked me to vote, whether it be an election for General Secretary or some other matter.  However as a member of one of the UK's biggest Unions, I recently found myself with a dilemma of which candidate to vote for as General Secretary.  At the time I was considering leaving this powerful Union for a more moderate and smaller Union, and was presented with a choice between two candidates who I believed to be very similar in a policy direction I did not consider to be desirable.

Against this backdrop, I simply could not support the manifesto of any candidate.  My response was to cast my vote with a spoiled ballot paper.  I have since decided to stick with the larger Union, mainly due to the excellent work done by the Union Reps at a local level.  On that note, I may well regret in years to come that I did not cast a vote in this particular election for either candidate on offer.  However, had I not cast my vote with the spoiled ballot paper, potentially my regret could be much greater.  AT LEAST I WAS TRUE TO MYSELF AND EXPRESSED WHAT I FELT AT THE TIME!

Now I do intend to continue to vote for a particular party/candidate at future UK Parliamentary and Local Authority elections.  That is despite me being a critic of the British Parliamentary Electoral System, the First Past the Post System.  The No Vote in the 2011 Referendum on Electoral Reform may well be a missed opportunity to give more voters the chance to be heard.  But from a personal personal perspective, should there ever be a moment in the future when I could not cast my vote to a particular party/candidate, I would have no hesitation in spoiling my ballot paper once again.

If we had a lot more voters spoiling their ballot papers than simply not casting their vote, the penny could well drop amongst the political classes that the Governing Party's share of the popular vote may not give them the necessary moral authority to carry through their programme of Government (even if they do have a working majority) and that to continue to ignore the voices at present which are unheard, cannot go on.  Considering turnouts at the last three British General Elections have been less than seventy per cent, turnout has been low enough as it is.

Like Brand, I share a strong distaste of a certain British newspaper owned by a certain Australian American Media Mogul.  His views will most definitely strike a chord with some disaffected sections of society.  But on the suggestion that it is good not to vote, I personally don't believe the Russell Brand option to be particularly appealing at all.

Discovering the treasure that is Dovedale

The Peak District National Park is Britain's oldest National Park.  Although most of the Peak District's area falls within the County of Derbyshire, five other counties also fall within the Peak District National Park's boundaries.  Living in the North West of England, I have made the odd foray from time to time into the Peak District down the years.  However, I only really concentrated such rare forays around the Buxton and High Peak area, due to it's proximity to the North West.  That changed in 2010 when my wife and I were travelling back from my brother's wedding in Northampton.  We decided on a night's camping on the way home, and had planned to look for a campsite in the Buxton area.  It was just after we drove through Ashbourne that we found a campsite by the road with it's own Pub and Microbrewery.

We had such a good time that night in September 2010 that we made arrangements to come back to the same campsite the following spring for a bit of a longer stay, and hopefully some nice country walking.  With walking in mind, it was during that longer stay in which I was to discover the River Dove and the treasure that is Dovedale, situated just four and a half miles from Ashbourne.  The scenery below does start to set the scene.  Although, there is much much more to come!

The main Dovedale Car Park is situated on the Derbyshire/Staffordshire Border between the villages of Thorpe (in Derbyshire) and Ilam (in Staffordshire).  Ilam Hall is also nearby.  Once the Car is parked and the walk commences, the real beauty of this limestone gorge within the River Dove Valley will soon take your breath away, just like it did mine!

And if that is not enough, how about the famous Dovedale Stepping Stones?

Like many Brits, I would state that I believe the Lake District is England's most beautiful national park.  But I do find the Peak District also to be particularly intriguing, and Dovedale is right up there with much of the finest scenery the Lake District has to offer.  My travelling experience of the Lakes is greater than my experience so far of the Peak District as a whole.  That said, I would be pleasantly surprised if I ever find another Peak District treasure to match Dovedale.  About twenty years before the Peak District itself became a National Park in 1951, there were suggestions that Dovedale itself could have become one of Britain's first national parks.  Not surprising really.

The walk along the River Dove from the Car Park to the Village of Milldale is about three miles long.  The good news for those walkers with an aversion to steep climbs, is that the walk is largely flat.  The walk also takes in wildlife and interesting rock formations on route to Milldale.

And so a most pleasant walk will finally conclude in Milldale.  The local shop will have a nice selection of sandwiches and other snacks, which can subsequently be enjoyed by the riverside.

Once you have enjoyed that snack, it is time to go again and walk back to the Dovedale Car Park, reliving the wonderful Dovedale experience one more time.