Skip to main content


I think the government are responding more quickly to disasters now. It struck me as odd that during the aftermath of the Tsunami the media had managed to get on the ground, but the government and many agencies had not.

Birmingham has responded well, not just because there are many people with links to the area, but because Birmingham does tend to respond well.


shaz said…
I think most cities have responded really well, all credit to the Media for creating a sense of urgency and postive proactive coordination.

For once the Media has done what it should always do, rather than the all to often negative stereotyping and social engineeering.

Some of the smaller less affluent areas in Birmingham raised over £300,000 in just two days.

Although the immediate concern is getting aid to the disaster stricken, in the long term, especially from the perspective of reconstruction, what can be done to prepare for an earthquake measuring over 7.5?

My close relatives from Kashmir felt the tremor but no casualties were reported as they live in an extremely rural area with few large concrete buildings. However two young girls who were living away from home in Ravlakot died when the school they studying in was demolished.
PoliticalHack said…
Why does it strike you as odd?

The media move in small teams - reporter, cameraman, producer/fixer and perhaps a security advisor.

A government response has to identify needs, move personnel, vehicles, heavy-lift aircraft and helicopters around the globe (with all the permissions required for overflight), establish logistics lines and then start shifting the volumes of supplies required.

The media will always be lighter on their feet in these circumstances.
john said…
You would expect some response from the ground.

In this instance I think DfID have been far better than the Tsunami.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…