Magna Carta and assisted dying

In 2015, I took an online course on The Magna Carta and its Legacy.  This was presented by my alma mater, Royal Holloway University of London, using the Coursera online platform, to coincide with the 800th anniversary of the original charter.  

The concluding assignment on the course was to write a clause for a modern Magna Carta that addresses the pressing issues and defends the rights that matter to me, and a written motion to persuade others that my clause should be adopted.   The total length was required to be 240 - 270 words - challenging for the topic that I chose, assisted dying.  

This subject continues in public debate, including a fine article by Alice Thomson, We need to talk about assisted dying, in The Times of 4th July 2018.  Some things have progressed - Canada, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, India, six US states  and from next year Victoria in Australia have now allowed doctors to prescribe a barbiturate drug to bring a life to a peaceful end.  Sadly, our own House of Commons rejected such legislation three years ago.  It's time that they re-examined the question.  Here are my proposed clause and motion:

Medical practitioners shall be empowered to prescribe life-ending drugs to mentally competent adults who wish to end unbearable suffering, loss of dignity or of autonomy caused by terminal illness. 

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 'a Magna Carta for our age', bans torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Since its adoption in 1948, medical science has advanced so that it can treat many common diseases. However, we all die eventually. End-of-life palliative care is often appropriate and effective, but for some, physical and mental suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life, cannot be prevented. Patients may endure years while 'nature takes its course'. 

This proposal gives the sick the confidence and the freedom that they need not face endless suffering. 

This is a difficult, emotive argument. Some religious groups hold that all life is sacred; only natural processes or divine intervention should determine the time of death. Others hold that members of religions may make a conscientious decision not to utilise a legal freedom, but should not stop others making their own choice. 

Opponents also fear a 'slippery slope' that could extend beyond the tight scope of consenting, mentally competent, terminally-ill adults. Several states have enacted assisted-dying laws, including Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Washington, Oregon and Vermont. All have monitored the effects carefully; public opinion remains largely in favour. None of the states has chosen to extend its legislative scope. 

In Britain, the public is heavily pro (82% according to the 2010 British Social Attitudes survey) but lawmakers are cautious. Australia has no current proposals; Canada's Parliament will consider legislation during its current session. 

That was 2015, and now is 2018.  Of course Brexit is top of most politicians' agendas, but surely Parliament should look again before long.

HMRC and Starbucks, Amazon and Google (amongst others)

It seems to me that Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has allowed companies like Starbucks, Amazon and Google to value inter-group transactions with complete freedom. This feels like public sector complacency, evidence of a cosy relationship where nobody on the collections side felt motivated or able to do much to change the status quo.  George Osborne's announcement of a boost to HMRC's legal teams and computer systems may shake things up.

In the case of Starbucks, their logo and their recipes have been valued as intellectual property bought from the parent group, even though the recipes have very probably been designed in the UK to match UK tastes. Who knows where their logo was designed? Their coffee beans have been reported as bought from a company in the Netherlands and roasted by a company in Switzerland. Has HMRC ensured that the valuations in all of these transactions are valid, or is it possible that Starbucks is unchallenged and can charge its UK operation well over the odds because there's no element of arms-length dealing? And how much cheaper could a cup of coffee be if the raw materials were bought at UK market prices?

Personally, I would find it hard to give up Amazon, if only due to Kindle. It needs to be supplied with new material on a frequent basis, and Amazon is the only source. According to The Times (£) today, which quotes the Public Accounts Committee, the company paid £151 million in 2011 alone for intellectual property, e.g. its brand name. That was enough to reduce its stated profit in the UK to £74 million - in other words, reduce it by over two thirds.  Smells bad for Amazon. 

Google seems to have been paying royalties to its operation in Bermuda. Presumably because Bermuda is the source of its search engine expertise? Again, this smells.

HMRC should examine all intra-group payments for Intellectual Property to make sure they're fairly valued. They should challenge retrospectively and with sanctions where valuations are not fair. And when they've had a good look at these, they should compare the price of coffee beans in open markets and in intra-group markets. And make some examples pour encourager les autres.

Apple and Chilli jelly

Great joy - followed Samantha Weinberg's recipe in The Times (£) of Thursday 29th September.  I used almost double the quantities given, to produce 17 pots (various sizes, 100-120 grams) of a delightful Apple and Chilli Jelly.

It might have had more of a kick if we'd been able to grow red chillis like those of a couple of years ago, or buy any really hot small red chillis in local shops. Sadly, we harvested hardly any this year - the second year running that we've had an almost complete failure. The cooking apples came from next door's tree, by arrangement.

This is the first time that I've made jam, marmalade or jelly other than when 'helping' a parent or grandparent (many years ago), so I had to learn by trying it out.  Experiences:

1. Muslin cloth (£3 from the local ironmonger) tied to a large bowl with string is much less expensive a straining method than a jelly bag with the kit to hold it; the whole caboodle would have cost a stupid £18 in all. Or if you are able, make a stand for a jelly bag out of metal coat hangers that came back with your dry cleaning. 
2. The measures seem to be about a pound of sugar to a pint of liquid, if that's the size of your measuring jug
3. The strained liquid looks pale white, having picked up hardly any colour from the chillis. Don't panic. When you add the sugar and start raising to the boil, it darkens. Once it's reached the boil, you can skim off a layer of scum and then what's left will darken more as it approaches the setting point
4. You don't have to be too gentle when boiling the liquid to set. Make sure it's boiling rather than simmering, and keep an eye on it - you don't want toffee. 
5. The test described in the article to find the setting point does work - if you're not too gentle.  Stirring doesn't seem to do any harm and as it's nearing readiness, stirring will cause the liquid to bubble up.  That could be your signal to start testing.

Bland's Law and the Big Society

"Good intentions are not enough to make a difference", wrote Sathnam Sanghera in the Business Life column of The Times on 26th July.   The author makes a good case for scepticism about the Prime Minister's 'Big Society' initiative.  

The article argues that voluntary bodies are inefficient, mismanaged, unrepresentative and crippled by backbiting. Sir Christopher Bland, the former chairman of BT, was quoted in support of the latter issue, as saying that in his experience “the amount of backbiting, infighting and general skulduggery in an organisation is in direct proportion to the nobility of its goals”. 

This deserves wider coverage - maybe it should be dubbed "Bland's Law" - and many people will be able to give examples of situations that wouldn't be allowed to occur in a professional or profit-led organisation.    

I'll concede the point on the unrepresentative nature of voluntary organisations.  Inevitably, the decision to participate involves self-selection and, vitally, having time to do it.  Don't forget though, that such work can be a great way to improve the CV and employability for people in all sorts of different parts of society.  


But aside from this, and Bland's Law, many voluntary organisations do a fantastic job, and have good processes and management practices.  I think the article is too pessimistic, but very thought-provoking.

Jenson Button and Ross Brawn

Congratulations to Jenson Button and Ross Brawn, and their team, on winning the Formula 1 drivers' and constructors' championships. It was a hell of an achievement, and a great story. I enjoyed this article from The Times.

Another thing that I admired was Ross Brawn - in an interview at his moment of victory, not mentioned in the newspaper - paying tribute to the members of the team who had to leave when it was downsized at the beginning of this year to save costs - but had done so much to develop the cars to a winning design.

Well done, everyone.

Best ever road deaths figure, but rural speed limits to be cut

In April, I blogged about the UK Government's initiative to cut speed limits in order to reduce the number of road deaths. My objections were:

Restriction of mobility when the UK already has some of the safest roads in the world

The method of enforcement (24x7 cameras) and civil liberties impact - everyone's movements could be logged and traced

The cost of installation and ongoing enforcement, including the possibility of another failed Government IT project

These proposals haven't gone away - they're out to consultation. The open consultation finishes on Tuesday 14th July, so if you have an opinion, you still have a few days to respond.

The Times reported on 25th June that Deaths on UK roads fall to record low.

Lord Adonis, the Transport Minister, says that "Britain now jointly has the safest roads of any major nation in the world".

I agree that every road death is unnecessary, but I disagree with the speed limit proposals. These will have a huge set-up and operating cost, and will restrict mobility outside built-up areas by increasing journey times at all times of day and night.

Some better approaches would be

Harsh penalties for causing death and serious injury; killing someone with a car is manslaughter or murder, and should be treated that way

Better road education: males under the age of 20 seem to be particularly likely to kill themselves, their friends, and innocent third parties

Restrictions on new drivers during the first few months after passing the test; curfews and rules about number of passengers, P plates (showing Passed - but recently)

Invest in better road layouts where these are known to be unsafe

Enforce speed limits in known black spots; this should be far cheaper than country-wide speed restrictions

Speed limit to be cut

The Times (21 April) reports that the speed limit on many UK A roads will be cut to 50 mph under plans to reduce the number of road deaths by a third. The default limit will be reduced from 60 mph to 50 mph unless the local council gives acceptable reasons to retain the higher limit. It would become easier for councils to reduce the limit on residential roads from 30 mph to 20 mph, and average speed cameras would be introduced to enforce the new limits.

The UK achieved huge improvements in road safety between 1990 and 1995, when the annual death rate fell from over 5000 to under 4000. It's now under 3000, and continuing to improve. This is despite a rising population and hugely increased number of vehicles using the roads. So despite the success of the current measures, our heroic Government has come up with an idea that will restrict everyone who lives outside a built-up area and uses cross-country routes. The unpopular measure can be enforced through the recruitment of thousands of new automated police officers (average speed cameras) that can issue penalties 24 x 7, regardless of the traffic and weather conditions, and into the bargain develop a database to show the vehicle movements of a majority of the population. So useful to maintain public safety.

Of course, in revenue terms, this will be 'free'. The cameras, data network, central fines processing and recovery, repairs, replacement, surveillance database if required, signposting, etc., will cost a few billions per year. But the Government probably reckons that it can get the money back through fines - and if they don't collect enough, keep raising the fines. If all else fails, print a bit more money. Of course, we can be sure that this HM Government IT project will be a glowing success. So important when taxpayers money is involved.

Of course, this may be just another kite-flying initiative either (a) to distract the mob from the appalling Government debt that will be revealed in today's Budget or (b) to allow the spin doctors to say "we've listened" when the whole thing is scrapped. Time will tell...

Greedy Times?

The hikes in the annual subscription for The Times/Sunday Times have outstripped the rises in the cover price. Since 2001, the cover price has doubled, but the subscription rate that we pay has almost trebled.

Annual subscription
06/06/2000: £91
23/05/2001: £91
17/06/2002: £91
4 x 12 weekly subscriptions: (add 8% for yearly rate)
24/11/2003 - 24/10/2004: £96
25/10/2004 - 10/09/2005: £120
11/09/2005 - 20/08/2006: £144
21/08/2006 - 16/07/2007: £156
17/07/2007 - 16/06/2008: £192
17/06/2008 - 16/05/2009: £216
17/05/2009 - 16/04/2010: £240 (about £260 a year)

Some cover prices gleaned from Google:
Oct 2001: 40p weekdays, 70p Sats, £1.20 Suns - £3.70 per week
Oct 2002: 45p weekdays, 80p Sats, £1.40 Suns - £4.45 per week
Sep 2006: 65p weekdays, £1.30 Sats, £2 Suns - £6.55 per week
Sep 2007: 70p weekdays, £1.40 Sats, £1.80 Suns - £6.70 per week
Aug 2008: 80p weekdays, £1.50 Sats, £2 Suns - £7.50 per week
Jan 2009: 90p weekdays, £1 Sats, £2 Suns - £7.50 per week