And the BBC stood so solidly behind Andrew Gilligan after he blew the whistle on the sexed up Saddam scoop that he's now working for Iranian TV.

I've had professional dealings with the BBC - they hired me to consult and do a very short expert slot on one of their shows - and they were indeed hopelessly shambolic and disorganised.

The BBC has always been the blandified voice of the establishment - occasionally authoritative, but utterly toothless in the face of real corruption, for the tragically obvious reason that it can't criticise governments aggressively when it relies on those governments for its income.

As for awards - the media are never self-congratulatory, of course.

Rather too much of the top BBC reporting and editorial talent makes the NYT op-ed team look expert.

I greatly appreciate the BBC. Their existence keeps the rest of the media honest. When Rupert has his way with the government, there will be nothing to stop Sky News becoming the same right wing lying trash that Fox News has become. Even the Daly Mail has to keep one foot in reality, however much the BBC tracks it.

But that doesn't mean I don't lambast it for that which it does badly. And it is very much stuck in a comfort zone. With honourable exceptions such as Panorama and some sections of Newsnight (both of which have suffered in recent years; Panorama has been all but cancelled, Newsnight is constantly under a budget constraint other depts seem to avoid) their jounalism has withered.

Uninterested, disinterested ? Ms Truss, it doesn't matter. They don't care. Really. People who report on politics for the BBC don't care about policy, aren't intrigued by implications, don't see contradictions. They just go for quotes and scuttlebutt about who's up or who's down.

This matters. Don't you see ? Really !! This is exactly why blogs came into their own, because the trad med were doing such a f-ck awful job of looking at what was going on, reducing it down to an ongoing series of "I'm a politician, get me outta here".

keep to the Fen Causeway

But yes, a bike is very convenient :)

Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.

you are the media you consume.

I think she is looking forward to her 6 (probably it will be 7 actually) months of maternity leave, starting on 12th January. Not because she can't cope though: she's still walking to the office most days, she's having a very smooth pregnancy.
Although we have a very bad-mannered son who kicks women (well, a woman at least) many times a day, with increasing force. Whatever happened to chivalry?


"Few can believe that suffering, especially by others, is in vain. - Galbraith"

We're very lucky to be able to get by with a combination of family, daddy working from home and mommy changing hours.

My brother and his partner can only afford the childcare because he works days and she works nights so it minimises the time my niece is in nursery.

Ad astra per aspera

To be fair, the attitude is a reasonable effect of trickle-down socialism [writ large, real estate].

and

To be precise, I also engaged a sitter half day who I sourced from the local library bulletin board @ GBP 10.00/hr.

Lesson: Bundled convenience does not come CHEAP.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

Oh yes -although I may still object to the word accessoires, meaning something you can easily dispense with.

The thing is, a few years ago I made an estimate on how much it would cost us to have a baby, in order to know how much we may want to save prior to that. I came up with 1300€/month, which people reckoned was extremely high. I explained that I came to this high number because we were rather well off, so that, for example, an extra room would be extra surface in a not too cheap part of the town, ditto holidays, food and even clothes, where we'd probably want to have quality stuff... This was based on some serious studies by INSEE, and used a ratio of parental income to come up with the costs, expressed as how much you'd need to maintain the very same standard of living for you and your child as you had before.

So, it appears that even in Paris 1300€ per month is  easily enough to do so.

Now in London, ALL of it and maybe more is likely to go into being able to leave the house to go to work -and that is not proportional to income, it's something anyone working is likely to need.

Of course, in France you get tax reduction when you have children, and a lot of state help, and there are more public creches (although not enough of them)... You also get a lot of help if you want to employ someone at home. You know, socialism ;-)

"Few can believe that suffering, especially by others, is in vain. - Galbraith"

A childminder is self-employed and has to be registered with the appropriate Government regulatory bodies. When registered, a childminder is checked for references, training, police record and health, and their home is inspected to make sure it's a safe and suitable environment for children.

After registration, a childminder is checked every one to three years to ensure they're continuing to provide a safe and suitable service.

All childminders in England and Wales (although not yet in Scotland and Northern Ireland) are required to complete a basic registration course, including first aid training. They may also have other childcare qualifications (eg, an NVQ in Early Years Care and Education, a vocational qualification at Level 3).

Somebody reported them and ofsted launched an investigation and told them they were no longer allowed to do this.  This was because it was an arrangement where they were 'rewarded' ie by having their child looked after in return for looking after the other child, and because it amounted to over a maximum limit of hours per year. Absolutely ridiculous.

The Education Minister has since clarified that such arrangements can take place once the legislation is amended but it does show you how highly regulated childcare is.

Ad astra per aspera

Admission made in a BBC program after the invasion.  What's that do for anybody?

"After the vote," so-and-so resigned.  Wow.  Better not kick this crowd in the groin, lest you break your foot.  I'll bet they even followed it up giving an anonymous quote to the Guardian.

Cook also doesn't seem to have been Foreign Secretary in 2003.  He was Leader of the House of Commons.  I, of course, assume you forgot to mention that.

I take your point on Clare Short, because if there's one rule to British politics, it's that you never screw with the International Development Secretary.

Now if only the head of the EPA would stand up against TARP, we'd really be in business.

I'm sure the "previously undisclosed letter" was excellent and sternly-worded and all that bullshit, and it clearly did a lot of good.

Shit, I'll bet one of Blair's aides even read it all the way through.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.