Councils are planning to raise taxes and cut local services after Government's spending squeeze

2016 could be a challening year for many local residents across the country, after English councils announced a possible rise of the council tax bills and cuts in several local services.

The budget meeting for the local councils will take place later in February, but many councillors are already warning that funding reductions from the Central Government will result to multi-million pound deficits for local communities.

Changes include a possible rise of council tax up to 3.99%, which is the maximum level permitted, as well as a rise of the adult social care insurance payment (premium), which means that council bills could go up by £47 a year for most Band D properties (the rating scale of the energy efficiency of a house – D is an average grade).

In addition, the reduction of the support grant from the Government to the councils might cause “deeper” cuts to a number of local services, including children's centres, short breaks for disabled children, bus subsidies, funding for theatres, museums, community gyms and projects encouraging people to stop smoking and preventing domestic violence. Also, charges for garden waste collections and bereavement services are set to rise in some areas.

It has also been revealed that over 25,000 jobs are under threat because of the cuts to services, while 15 district councils will see their central government grant withdrawn next year and 168 local authorities will have lost their full support grant by 2019/2020.

However, the Department for Communities and Local Government believes that council tax bills will be less at the end of David Cameron’s government, as now councils “will have almost £200 billion to spend on local services and they can plan their funding settlement with more certainty”.

A closer look at the Christopher Jefferies story and the contempt of court

On December 17^th 2010 Joanna Yeates, a 25-year-old landscape architect, went missing in Bristol, after a night out with colleagues.  Following one of the largest police investigations ever undertaken in the Bristol area, Yeates’ body was discovered on Christmas Day of the same year in Failand, North Somerset. A post-mortem examination showed that she had been strangled to death.

It was later revealed that Vincent Tabak, Yeates’ neighbour, was found guilty of her murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Joanna Yeates pictured in 2009

However, Christopher Jefferies, a retired teacher and Yeates’ landlord, was initially arrested on suspicion of her murder. Although it was quickly established that Jefferies – who was never charged – was innocent of any involvement in the crime, his arrest excited great interest in all media around the UK.

Several UK newspapers published negative articles about Mr. Jefferies and “compendious details of his character and personal habits”. (see Wilby, 2011)

The Sun described Jefferies as “weird, posh, lewd and a creepy oddball”, The Daily Star announced “Jo landlord a creep who freaked out schoolgirls” and “angry weirdo”, while The Daily Mirror branded him as a “nutty professor with a bizarre past, who was arrogant, rude and snob.”

Attorney General Dominic Grieve stated on December 31^st 2010, in an interview for BBC Radio 4 that “newspapers and all media are under a legal obligation to observe the principles of the Contempt of Court Act.” He also added that “contempt laws protect an individual going through the investigative and legal process to ensure a fair trial could take place.”

According to Mike Todd and Mark Hanna “the law of contempt protects the integrity of the administration of justice, and the fundamental principle that a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Contempt of law most affects journalists when they publish material which might affect a trial, by making a jury more likely to find a defendant guilty – or innocent – or by influencing witness’s evidence.” (Dodd and Hanna, 2014, p. 212)

“The media may run the risk of breaking the Contempt of Court Act 1981 if they comment on active proceedings, jury deliberations, criticise the judiciary or disobey a court order.” (Bland et al., 2005, p. 15)

Jefferies pictured before his arrest in 2010

Jefferies was released from police bail on March 4^th 2011 and subsequently “the High Court granted the Attorney General permission to bring a case against tabloids and move a motion for committal of Contempt of Court against The Sun and the Daily Mirror.” (see BBC.com, 2011)

Eventually, Jefferies launched legal action against eight newspapers and won an undisclosed sum in libel and substantial damages for defamation from The Sun, The Daily Mirror, The Sunday Mirror, The Daily Record, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Daily Star and The Scotsman. The Sun and The Daily Mirror were also fined £18,000 and £50,000 respectively, for the way they reported his arrest.

The coverage of Christopher Jefferies’ arrest and the lawsuit against UK newspapers demonstrates that the “crime” of Contempt of Court suggests that publications about on-going legal cases might impede the administration of justice and can also create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to any potential future trial. Even though Jefferies was innocent, the media presented him as guilty and these false accusations could possibly influence the jury negatively.

Has Scuba Diving become an unpopular sport in the UK?

The last few years in the UK, a great number of scuba diving clubs, diving shops and sports centers with diving facilities have closed, due to lack of participation.

Diving instructors are worried that diving is slowly becoming an unpopular sport among young people.

Professional divers Suzy Butler and Harry Saville from the London School of Diving and the Wraysbury Diving Centre, discuss the reasons why Scuba Diving is slowly “shrinking” in the UK.

Here is a video I filmed and edited to give you an idea about UK diving:

Cameron hints Brexit if reformed plans with EU are not met

As the future EU referendum divides the nation, Cameron warns European leaders that Britain “will only stay in a reformed EU”

Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron delivers a speech on EU reform, at Chatham House in London, Britain November 10, 2015. © Kirsty Wigglesworth / Reuters

When David Cameron announced during the EU reform speech at Chatham House in London last Tuesday, that he wants changes to happen in the relationship between the UK and the EU, the question about “Brexit” was raised once again.

Should the UK leave the EU or not?

Britain’s Prime Minister stated that his main priorities are “to introduce an arrangement where unwanted EU legislation could be blocked and to reduce the number of people moving to the UK from other EU countries.” Mr. Cameron gave reasoning behind these suggestions, but was immediately met with resistance over his demands.

The European Commission described Mr. Cameron’s proposals as “highly problematic”, while Jean-Claude Juncker, the Commission’s president, made it clear in a caustic speech about the UK, that Brussels is still not taking the threat of Britain leaving the EU seriously.

It is well known by now that the relationship between the UK and the EU has long been one of the most divisive issues in British politics. As John Redwood MP said “it is like a bad marriage”.

David Cameron has pledged to redraw the UK-EU relationship and hold a national referendum on EU membership by the end of 2017.

The referendum is increasingly seen by the British public as a way to settle the vast number of political issues the EU membership raises and unsurprisingly, political parties are also keen on the idea;

Mayor of London, Boris Johnson thinks that “if we are successful in our negotiations, we should stay in a reformed EU. Britain has a great deal to gain from independence and it is time our friends in the EU realise we mean it. We want to stay in, but not at any price.”

The latest poll from the Daily Mail shows a divided nation of Europhiles and Eurosceptics on whether Britain should remain a member of the EU – 51% of people would vote “No”.

Gerard Batten, UKIP MEP for London has said that “the EU is a grandiose political project, which creates an undemocratic super-state that suits the interests of a European political and ideological elite. Inside the EU, Britain will eventually cease to exist as an independent democratic nation.”

In contrast, Marina Yannakoudakis, former Conservative MEP for London, believes that a “No” vote would reopen the question about the independence of the other countries within the UK: “Wales, Scotland and Ireland all want to stay in. Does that mean that the UK would have to split?”

She also added that “it will totally be the wrong move to leave the EU. There will be many issues for England and other European countries if we go down that route.”

One thing is for sure; UK’s EU membership is in the hands of the British public and it is important that both sides of the argument are heard. It is an issue that needs to be solved with careful consideration of all the implications.

Original Sources:

Boris Johnson, Member of Parliament for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (CON)

Gerard Batten, Member of the European Parliament for London (UKIP)

Marina Yannakoudakis, former Member of the European Parliament for London (CON)

Dr Syed Kamall, Member of the European Parliament for London (CON)

Does money actually make us happy?

I remember when I was a kid, on my birthday, first of all my mum would always wish me good health, followed by happiness and success. Even to this today, she still tells me that health is the most important gift we could ask for. I must admit I didn’t understand what she meant back then. I was hoping she would wish for me to become the best student in my classroom, the prettiest or the richest and most successful journalist.

I felt that having lots of money was more important. You could buy everything and be happy. You can even “buy” your health, I believed. At least that’s what the TV films and the society I grew up in made me think.

In Greece, where I come from, when there is a problem or an issue in our lives, we take a deep breath and say “on top of all is health” and everything else can be solved. Instead of cheers we toast “to our health”.

Yes, I do agree that health is very important, but can we not “buy” it? I mean if we are rich we can pay for better doctors, go to better hospitals, have the best medical therapies or buy the best medication on the market.

I am thinking that if two people, one very poor and one very rich, both have the same serious illness and both need to go to the hospital and be treated, who’s more likely to survive?

The poor person might not even be able to afford the hospital fees in some countries, while the rich person can travel the world and find the best specialists and professionals.

See for example Ashya King’s story, when his parents abducted him from a hospital in Southampton, so he could receive a better – and more expensive – treatment abroad, against medical advice. The boy received a costly proton beam treatment and managed to survive.

I sometimes also feel that our main purpose on earth today is to make money, so we can survive. From six years old until 18 we go to school and study, we learn things so we can get into university. Then at university we study a degree, do work placements so we can find a job and have money. It seems like all our lives we are working to make money, become rich, enjoy the material luxuries and have a stable life for ourselves, our families and children.

So it is obvious that money does matter a lot in every person’s life. How happy can it make us though?

In 1964 The Beatles sang “I don't care too much for money, for money can't buy me love” and indeed money cannot buy everything, like I used to think when I was younger.

January 2016 has been a very sad month in the “celebrity world”.

Legendary English musician David Bowie passed away on January 10^th, at the age of 69 after secretly battling liver cancer for several months. Later, on the 14^th of January, Harry Potter’s Severus Snape, actor Alan Rickman died from pancreatic cancer. On the same day, René Angélil, singer, manager and husband of superstar Celine Dion died after a long, 18-year battle with throat cancer. Only two days later, Dion’s brother, Daniel died from the same disease.

All these people had a few things in common; yes they all died in January 2016 and yes they all died from cancer, but they were also all rich and famous.

Maybe money helped them “buy” a few more days of their lives and live a little bit longer, but the ending would have been the same whether they were rich or not.

I realise that my mum has always been right; health is more important than money or any material object. If you are healthy you can work hard and maybe become rich, but no matter how rich you are, if you are not healthy you will not live long enough to enjoy your money and the rewards of your work.

I suppose money makes us partially happy because if we are rich, we don’t have to care about money, about jobs and how can we pay our bills. We would probably only worry about how we could become even richer.

I think it is a common misconception that lots of money does make us happy. Of course I don’t underestimate the power of money and its importance in our lives, but what if we don’t have special people around us to share our happiness? And I think one of the main ingredients to happiness is health.

Maybe we could have both happiness and money – although it is very rare – but for sure money alone won’t make us happy.

Read about Ashya King's story here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3148042/Cancer-patient-Ashya-King-six-parents-arrested-taking-abroad-pioneering-treatment-UK-given-clear.html

Has Adele changed the music industry?

A review on the best-selling artist of the 2010s

In the century of commercialisation, where music equals vulgarity, coarse language and repeated electronic beats, and music videos have become a synonym to nudity and provocative dancing, there comes British singer Adele to prove that there is still hope for real, quality music in this industry.

Adele Adkins, who in 2008 graduated from the BRIT School for Performing Arts & Technology, in Croydon – along with singers Leona Lewis and Jessie J – has already, at only 28, broken several records.

 

Her album 21 sold more than 35 million copies worldwide, becoming the best-selling album of the 21^st century. She also became the first artist to ever sell three million albums in the UK in one calendar year and was recently named the most successful British female artist of the past century. But records in the music world are not what make Adele a “different” type of artist.

 

In 2017 it almost comes as no surprise to hear that even A-list singers use auto-tune to sing digitalised songs with cheap productions.

Adele, on the other hand, only uses real instruments on her records and usually sings with only the help of a background piano (Someone Like You) or a background acoustic guitar (Daydreamer).

Every single song from her studio albums 19, 21 and 25 is written by her (except Make You Feel My Love, which is a Bob Dylan cover) and as she admits, all the lyrics come from personal experiences. That easily explains why her voice sounds so genuine and full of emotion.

She has succeeded in differentiating herself from her peers, with music that does not sound like anyone else’s at this time. Who else sounds like Adele?

As the iHeartMedia president, John Sykes, said “[Adele] is an artist who comes around once every generation. There may not be a voice more precious to the music industry than Adele’s today.”

 

Unlike the majority of singers today, she does not use her image – or rather her body – to sell records. She does not wear extremely short skirts, shorts and bralets – which cover as much as a swimsuit – and does not dance like a wild maniac on stage. She also does not tend to get naked at any possible chance and call that “confidence”, “feminism” or “girl power”. On the contrary, she prefers to wear simple black lace dresses, leggings and flat shoes. She never tries to shock and she does not seem to care about gaining publicity.

Many people would say that the main reason Adele does not choose to show much skin is because her physique does not match that of a stereotypical modern pop star (basically she is normal and does not starve herself to death for fame). I say the reason is that Adele respects herself and her body too. She does not need to have an oversexualised image to attract attention, simply because she can still be gorgeous and radiant with clothes on, and simply because it is all about her music, her voice and her talent.

Her music video for Hello, which was filmed in a sepia tone at a small house in the woods, became the most viewed video (27. 7 million views) on YouTube within 24 hours, knocking Taylor Swift’s Bad Blood off the top. The video has over 1 billion views today!

More recently in the US, her latest album 25 became the fastest-selling album in one week, with 2.4 million sales, a record which was previously held by NSYNC for 15 years.

She has truly become unstoppable.

It feels like Adele has something special that is missing from the music industry today; elegance and class. Surprisingly though, she is a very approachable person. You would think she would speak the Queen’s English with the poshest accent possible, but once she opens her mouth you would be stunned by her heavy cockney accent. You would swear that Adele’s speaking and singing voices are coming from two different people.

She might be a mega global star, but at the same time she looks like your lovely auntie that you want to hug or your funny friend that you go for a pint in the local pub with.

She is also very British in the way she talks and in the way she sings and acts – unlike most English performers today who lose their identity and try to ‘Americanise’ themselves, their style, their attitude and their music.

Adele usually likes to take off her shoes and sing bare feet on a little carpet when she is on stage. She always talks to the audience, says a little story behind the songs and also has a laugh. Just simple and human, like everybody else.

Her songs are about real events and real people. And that is why her fans can relate to her.  

But no matter her audience’s age, Adele has managed with her music to make people feel pain and heartbreak, even if they have never been in love.

On a YouTube video of her live performance of “When We Were Young”, one fan writes: “I miss you my imaginary ex-lover.” That sums it up.

I would go as far to say that we are witnessing a music legend that will still be playing in our CD players and on our radio stations for many more years to come. And I am looking forward to hearing what story Ms. Adkins will talk about next.