To be honest, I’m mainly writing this post because I feel I ought to write something. I’ve been a tad busy lately, with a trip down to Oxford for a political convention over last weekend, and increasing input needed on my studies, but that’s no reason not to keep this blog going, so my topic to get back into the habit of blogging is the nonsense over Brand and Ross at the BBC.

I’m not for one second suggesting that they should be excused for what they broadcast, but the level of media coverage given over to the story seems to have been somewhat out of proportion. It reminds me of the recent car bomb in a European capital city. The most read story on the BBC News site the following day was about hydrogen sulphide, and the bomb story was low on the list of headlines across most outlets of the BBC.

As of writing, the less significant columns on the site are reporting that there has been an earthquake in Pakistan, a ruling on assisted suicide, and the Metropolitan Police have shot dead a man. Of these stories, which is more important: internal disciplinary action for two BBC staff members, or any one of the others?

[End of rant, I'll try to be more positive with my next post.]

Just listening to Analysis on the BBC World Service, the presenter from RIA-Novosti seems to be suggesting that Russia is for Obama. Anyway, just a short post, as I’m off to a long meeting, then to Oxford for a political weekend.

A limited briefing today, and also possibly the last one for a little while, as I’m just a tiny bit pre-occupied with one or two other things.

Europe

The Council of Ministers has supported waste-to-energy incineration as part of the new waste directive, which also calls for 50% of household waste to be recycled by 2050.

A recently published Eurobarometer poll on animal cloning reveals that 61% of respondents thought such cloning was morally wrong. When figures from individual states are viewed, Austrians were most likely to think animal cloning was morally wrong, and us British were the least likely.

I’m not entirely sure what to make of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe’s flash-based “The Changers” game, but is seems to be promoting action against climate change, so, if you can figure it out, it may be worth a look.

So Sarah Palin sat at the “news-desk” on Saturday Night Live and nodded her head along in good humour to Amy Poehler rapping through her campaign. Why doesn’t this happen in British politics? There is a lot to dislike in Palin’s politics, but just as with McCain and Obama’s recent after-dinner speeches, she’s shown that she can see the light side of the campaign and politics.

I wouldn’t suggest that all the ‘popular’ bits of American politics should be adopted, but seeing the debates, campaigning where the candidates meet ordinary activists (and sometimes even real people), and television participation, it seems that the candidates have a higher profile. Probably the voter turnout will be less that it could be, but — so long as it is backed by actual policy positions — the degree to which the campaigns communicate with the electorate seems really positive. And yes, I know that the positions they’re running for are just a tiny bit more significant than a seat in the Commons, but there’s still scope for scaled down self-deprecation and popular communication.

Climate & Energy Package

Ok, so things didn’t look good for the climate and energy package before it went before the environment committee of the European Parliament a couple of weeks ago, but it got through just about all right. Well today the European Council managed to make time to discuss it, in between Gordon Brown saving capitalism, and it seems that, while the eastern Europeans didn’t make much of a dent on it in earlier stages, they are doing their best to water it right down now. Euractiv reports that there is co-operation, but it seems likely that the final agreement will be a shadow of what it should have been.

Canada

Brave faces and disappointment for the Greens were the result of the general election in Canada. Despite gaining 6% of the vote, the party didn’t manage to elect an MP. It looks like the same old problems as we have in the UK were partly to blame: non-proportional electoral system, other parties spouting “greenwash”, &c.

UN

The United Nations Environment Programme will be leading an initiative to develop a workable “green new deal. The proposals are separate from the New Economic Foundation’s report on the same topic which was produced by a committee including Caroline Lucas, and while seeming to be watered down slightly, should be welcomed.

I wasn’t quite sure what aspect of poverty to write this post for the Blog Action Day on. The obvious one would be poverty in Scotland. We have loads of press releases, newspaper stories, and as far as I can tell, forgotten government targets to eliminate child poverty. But I’ve been campaigning for Fairtrade for a few years, so I thought that might make a more interesting topic.

A Fairtrade campaign isn’t really an environmental one, there’s food-miles to take into account, and no commitment to produce fair trade produce in an environmentally sustainable way, but fair trade does do a lot to alleviate poverty in, primarily, farming communities. Unfortunately, and, I suppose, inevitably, as the campaigning for fair trade, and its share of the market for things like coffee or bananas has grown, so has the criticism.

Fairtrade will never end all the poverty in the world: true. Fairtrade is anti-market: only a tiny bit true. And so on, and so forth with the list of criticisms. During a debate on fairtrade which I held during Fairtrade Fortnight last March, one of the speakers, Paul Cammack, used a quote from the ‘Merchant of Venice’:

“how far that little candle throws its beams, so shines a good deed in a naughty world”

This is a pretty good description of the utility of fair-trade. No, fair-trade will not end all poverty, but it is a valuable measure to take while the argument for a fairer global trading system is put, and hopefully won. Surely, it is better to ensure that at least some people are able to access electricity, clean water, health care, education, and the basic infrastructure needed for a decent quality of life, not to mention allowing diversification into other more profitable crops, than it is to deny this to everyone until the long uphill slog of reforming global trade systems is complete?

So go and buy more Fairtrade coffee, tea, bananas, wine, clothes, or any of the myriad products on offer. But also get out pen and paper, and write to your MSP, MP, MEP, eurodéputé, or whatever you call people in power, and demand that everyone is given a fair shot in the global trade system.

And the special award for most pointless newspaper article of the day goes to The Times, for a piece on how Peter Mandelson was a quiet and unobtrusive neighbor. Apparently there was no scandal or “loud samba music” at his Herefordshire holiday home, no matter how much the journalist wanted that to be the case. I’ll stay on the lookout for articles that have less substance, though it may take a while to find something which surpasses this.

It probably isn’t related to anything I’ve written (though Analytics did show scotlandoffice.gov.uk as having referred a couple of visits to this blog), but Jim Murphy’s ministerial blog now has an RSS feed, and comments! No one appears to have actually commented on anything yet, but I’m sure that’ll change soon. I’ll certainly be following what is written, now that I can read it in Mail.app.