Coffee - Good or Bad - The age old debate!

So the other day I was working with a friend in the University Library when we were disrupted by an irate Librarian as she punished someone for drinking coffee in the library.

Ok you think - fair enough they should not be drinking hot drinks around books and computers, however what I have not told you is that the library actually sells coffee as well as other hot beverages and food!

Now I believe that it is unacceptable to on one hand be prepared to take money off you but on the other punish you for purchasing and consuming their products. It is unacceptable to do this as it is highly hypocritical to be prepared to take money off a product which is effectively banned from the library. Now although in their defence they place posters of spilt coffee around the library is this a significant / acceptable deterrent? No it isn't - it is merely a token.

So how does this fit into society? one word - smoking.

Continually the government cover the packets of cigarettes in slogans such as, 'smoking kills' and images of unhealthy body parts, yet despite the knowledge that smoking kills - the government are still prepared to sell them.

Again, although on a higher scale this is inexcusable - either allow people to smoke, free from images and comments or ban it completely, do not be a hypocrite and allow it to happen whilst making significant amounts of money through taxation.

This message also goes for the university - you want to make money - that is fine, but do not sell me products and then condemn me for using them, this is wrong and should be changed.

Lady Gaga - Born This Way

So yesterday saw the 'grand-unveiling' of Lady Gaga's latest single, 'Born This Way' despite the fact that her previous album, The Fame / The Fame Monster is still relatively fresh and still receiving plenty of radio play. This is no surprise however with modern day artists like Rihanna churning out album after album, hit after hit, year after year.



Now before we even look at the single it is important to note that no matter how good the single is, it would have been difficult for L.G to produce anything to critical acclaim, with four UK number one singles resulting from her debut album it would be difficult for anyone, even L.G to replicate the success, and therefore I will try to remain impartial toward this song.



The first thing which hit me when I listened to the song was the thumping guitar and strong drums which I thought would lead to another song - instantly recognisable and dominating radio play for months... but then L.G started singing and something wasn't quite right, and the only conclusion which I could come to is, think eighties lyrics/singing on a modern music track. I'm going to confess I read an article on the song before I listened to it but I tried to remain impartial - and the one significant point which I can pick out from the article is just how much it rips off Madonna's, 'Express Yourself'. That in itself is quite disappointing as I have always liked L.G for her originality but this song could quite easily be sung by any female X-Factor contestant.



What will be interesting is to see just how successful it will be and if following singles can live up to her previous success. With Britney and L.G set to go head to head my tip is on Britney to come out on top

Political Reform

I was doing some reading on electoral systems the other day and I came across 'Initiatives'. They are political devices which can be used to enfranchise the people of a state to have a greater say.

Rather than merely electing a representative to look after your interests for a set peiod of time - initiatives allow for the electorate to bring forward legislation if enough people sign the petition.

Now although this figure changes, a common region can be found at around 25% of those who voted. For example Austria (250,000) in 2006 petitioned to leave the E.U if Turkey were to join - highlighting the influence of the people on more than just election day.

Now putting this into context - wouldn't it be fantastic if this was deployed in Jersey!

I'm forever reading in the J.E.P that people are fed up with how things are run - well now if say 10,000 people went to the States Building to sign a properly administered petition (rather than the recent failure of G.S.T petition organised by the J.D.A) then they could reverse legislation which they felt was going against the will of the people.

Off the top of my head we could well see the removal of;

- The reduction in the number of Senators
- The removal of G.S.T
- The removal of zero ten

By introducing such a measure we are becoming more democratic. One election every 3,4 or 6 years is not enough and by introducing this public opinion is always measured and taken into account further.

By introducing a more informal approach to politics more people may become involved as opposed to the formalities of voting. Voter Turnout therefore increases with the increased number of interested people / reduction in apathy as they're now having their say!!

We have a responsibility to hold the States of Jersey to account - and by introducing such a method we would have more of a say!

APOLOGIES

Hey guys,

I'm so sorry that I haven't posted since my debut but 1) I have been really busy with course deadlines and 2) I forgot my password (how silly!!??!!)

What I want to talk about today is a reasonably hot topic in Jersey, and one which is always worthy of debate.... The role of the Council of Ministers!

Since Clothier was published and adopted (in part) we have witnessed a transition in power away from the Chamber to the CoM. [I am more or less repeating Deputy Le Claire's speech from the last sitting BTW]

No longer are unlimited written questions and oral questions allowed, but Ministers are only allowed to be questioned for a set amount of time with one supplementary per member. I personally think this is wrong, however in the name of restricting drabble I can accept this.

What I cannot agree with is Senator Routier's proposition to get 7 signatories on each debate. This is totally unacceptable as any member should be allowed to bring forward report and propositions in the name of democracy. If you live in a Parish which only has two representatives and you have a concern - how on earth are you expected to get 7 signatories on a parochial debate?

Let us not forget what Lincoln said - Democracy is the government of the people, by the people for the people. It is not the government of the Com, by the Com, for the people to swallow!!

As well as clearly matching Alexis De Tocqueville's fear of a tyranny of the majority (As those who live in Parishes with a small number of parishioners would be suppressed) it is also another classic example of a lack of the separation of powers within the Jersey system as Routier - an assistant minister of the Executive, is trying to remove power of the Legislature.

It cannot go on like this - things need to change in Jersey before one straw too many breaks the Camel's back.