That Budget is Crackers, Gromit!

Following the (unsurprising) budget announcements last Wednesday, there has been a great deal of debate as to whether it is a budget for the millions or for the millionaires, the effect of the supposed ‘granny-tax’ and heated divisions regarding the 50p tax rate.

However, there has been little talk of what the budget may mean for students and the younger generations, whose job prospects are bleak and whose applications are riddled with the ‘experience vs qualifications’ conundrum that blights so many in the 16-25 age bracket.

Indeed, the budget announcements appear to do little in the way of helping these frequently marginalised groups of society. So often do people talk of clichés that the young are the decision makers of tomorrow, and yet this truth does very little in our favour. In fact, the budget just serves to make us all the more cynical.

With the increase in the price of alcohol and cigarettes, no longer are the old havens of retreat safe: rather the stress-relief of students nationwide is in jeopardy of becoming another ill-affordable luxury. Alright, it may ensure a few less damaged livers and a couple of higher-capacity lungs, but these items symbolise a retreat from the embittered adult world that students sooner or later have to enter. So it stands to reason that many young adults may opt to still purchase the alcohol at the expense of proper foodstuffs. In an increasingly saturated graduate market, forgetting the misery of an ever more ‘worthless’ degree, spiralling debts and fewer job prospects is only facilitated by the odd pint or seven.

Besides, students will be all the more inclined to stay inebriated with the introduction of the pasty tax: no more sobering cheap foods to end the night out. That questionable imported meat, at questionable prices, that smells so aromatic at 3am will no longer linger around dorms the next day. Perhaps the next move would be to add extra taxes to beans and bread so as to capitalise off the staple beans on toast?

If sobriety sticks, the lonely nights in deliver the promise of, well, Wallace and Gromit, which is ever so entertaining and pivotal in the lives of 16-25 year olds. That’s smashing, Osborne (or crackers. Pick one).

However, rentals of everyone’s fave pooch inventor and his gullible owner may be all the pockets will stretch to with the freeze of minimum wage for 18-20 year olds. Of course, this decision follows the logic that with a stopper on increasing wages, more jobs will be created for the young people. Newsflash: The UK is back in recession. Scrap that last.

So dust off the old bottles of Jack for some measly measures that will hopefully make cartoon capers all the more appealing. Resounding cheers from the ‘enfranchised’ under-25s everywhere.

That is cheers from the under 25s when London is vandalised once again. Essentially, amidst the squashed bottom and the squeezed middle, there is the forgotten generation and this budget does little to help any of these groups. This is all the more concerning this week because inquests have ruled  overlooked families and youths as one of the key contributors to last year’s UK riots. And following this, some Westminster MPs decided that all of the above tax changes were a proper course of action. With growth in reverse and prospects for youths few, it’s no wonder this government is thought of as backwards.

At least we’re of a generation that deems the stamp irrelevant…

Work out the tax changes to your life here.

What happened to the spread of Kony 2012?

Two weeks ago, the Kony 2012 campaign became a viral sensation around the globe, really capitalising on what the video itself describes as a unique moment in human history, through galvanising its audience to share the short film through Facebook and Twitter.

Overnight, news feeds became awash with a youth army ready to take up virtual arms against a Ugandan war lord that the overwhelming majority had never heard of but 24 hours previous.

Posters for the campaign:
http://yinnyang.co.uk/2012/03/kony-2012/kony-2012/

With the exponential growth in online activism that followed, all aspects of Joseph Kony, the LRA, Uganda and Invisible Children were suddenly subjects of furious debate between the social networking community; questions of the charity’s integrity came to light, alongside other information that made the bewitching film appear all too simplistic and ensnaring.

I was surprised, when raising the subject with my parents, to find that neither of them had the faintest inclination of the events in motion. Considering this point, I quickly realised that the movement had generated little interest beyond the online domain. Newspapers and news channels proffered minimal to non-existent coverage of the campaign in question. Chat programmes and daytime television barely brushed upon the issue.

Then it occurred to me that the unusual beauty of the Kony campaign was that it had incited to action young people, young adults, just as Joseph Kony himself has plucked children from their homes.

Awakening these youths to new ideas, the movement seemingly managed to take a hold of the logic of the 13-25 age population of Facebook. These users account for approximately half of all subscribers to the service and are the generation that effortlessly pivot and gravitate around ideas through peer sharing.

Revolutions worldwide this past year have been driven by young, incensed persons ready to create change; from Egypt, to Syria, from protests against University tuition fees, to London riots.

Within the first couple of minutes of the video, director Jason Russell describes this particular campaign as an ‘experiment’. Over and above the sheer number of ‘friends’ who had shared the video, this single statement made me wary of the film’s intentions. Instead of watching the following thirty minutes of footage with disbelief, I held this phrase in mind and scrutinised the methods by which the video moves to incite the emotions and lay the foundations for a mass, united uprising.

Essentially, all those who share the video prove that the correct application of social media can provide the leverage and manipulation required to garner the support of an entire cross-section of society.

However, the recent riots and violent unrest around the globe are the product of anger provoked by those whose voices that have gone unheard. The under-25 group remain largely outside of Western democracy decisions. They are not high ranking figures, not barristers, bankers, or law-makers at Westminster. For that reason, the video itself targets these types of influential peoples.

 

Yet, this creates a discord and disjunction between practice and plight. Whilst the objective to overthrow a fierce dictator (with numerous crimes against humanity to his name) is a fine goal, the dependence on the co-operation of these different groups is flawed.

The film itself highlights the difficulties in acquiring support of the American government and the cover the night campaign is further testament to the continued troubles of retaining that backing. Without the constant aid from these people in power, there can be no dedicated search for Kony.

Yet, many youngsters sharing the video appeared oblivious to this fact. They spread the film in order to feel as though they had contributed to the downfall of a dictator, without much physical campaign following.

Writing a fortnight after the initial onslaught of Kony challengers, it is difficult to see what this first stage of the campaign has achieved outside of the blogosphere of social websites. Already, the presence of the Kony 2012 activism is fading just as dramatically as it inundated accounts at the start of March.

Youngsters, eager but inexperienced in politics, feel that their work in the process has been achieved. The elder enfranchised, still counting for 50% of Facebook users and a far higher percentage of voters, remain oblivious to the fighting efforts of their online compatriots.

Supporters of Invisible Children, largely youngsters,
sleeping outside in Portland in 2006 to symbolise the
situation of children in Uganda, who gather in large groups
at night to avoid the Lord's Resistance Army.

Jon Madrigal:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_love/137744885/

Certainly, the ‘Cover the Night’ movement on 20^th April could reverse this decline, and make Kony a public figure, but it depends on the continued support of a virtual world of campaigners. After all, Invisible Children Inc has released a campaign video on similar topical issues for almost a decade now and this is the first time that any of their films has received widespread recognition. Simply hitting the ‘share’ or ‘retweet’ buttons has rocketed the programme to ‘en vogue’ status amongst young adults, but this youth demographic continues to be one of the most volatile and shifting segments of society. Unless this group of people remain behind the Kony ideal, the whole project will collapse as a result of teenage passivity and apathy. Without spreading the idea to elder generations, there is serious threat of the cause falling-in on itself through lack of diverse support.

Twitter stands as the possible frontier by which to make or break the project. The age range with the most active users is the 35-44 group, with 25-34 year olds not too far behind. Together, these users make up 55% of the Twitter population. Whilst this certainly promotes Twitter as the domain to reach respectable, middle-class people, the most frequent users still fall in the under 24 age range.

Even with the support of some elder public figures, the active Kony demographic remains predominantly under the age of 25. Cover the Night may act to sway other social groups; however, it is likely that whilst the posters will generate some interest and attention, the middle-class workers with money may view the campaign as ‘fly-posting’, and look at the mass posters as graffiti, as defacing their town and city. With busy lives, jobs and commitments, it may take much stronger, persistent action to convince and coerce the over 25s into support. Struggling to find a way to get these people involved is a crucial stumbling block.

“Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come” opens the short film, but the idea of Kony, the experiment of Kony, already appears to have had its time. Whilst the video has received over 80 million hits globally at the time of writing, its Youtube statistics stand to reiterate that it is ‘most popular with 13-24 year olds’. In the past week, viewing of the video has comparatively ground to a halt.

The campaign is experimental because, whilst it begins as a viral, it needs to continue to manifest itself to generate a presence in the real world. The use of social media to incite revolution is not experimental so much as a proven tool for change, following Egyptian action last year. The real experiment is keeping these Western youngsters, who have never had to fight for democracy, interested and involved.

On 21^st April, still a month away, the experiment will either ultimately fail or succeed in making Kony famous by culminating in ‘Cover the Night’. However, with four weeks for support to dwindle, it is concerning that “an idea whose time has come” is being put on hold for so long.

After all, you cannot overthrow a Ugandan dictator by simply sharing a video…

No Day of Rest.

Over the weekend, Osborne introduced new Sunday trading laws for the duration of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games.

Under the rulings, there will be no major restrictions on Sunday trading as is the norm in the UK.

The Chancellor stated that with so many hundreds of thousands of people coming to the country to enjoy the games, it would only be sensible to extend opening hours so as these people could enjoy the retail experience too.

Suspension of the Sunday trading laws is due to run for eight weekends from the 22^nd of July.

George Osborne explained his decision in a television interview, stating that “It would be a great shame - particularly when some of the big Olympic events are on Sunday - if the country had a closed for business sign on it.”

Mixed responses have followed the news, with some believing it a celebration of British retail as defined by Westfield shopping complex, whereas others bemoan the legislation as detracting from the small, unique and diverse independent shops that London has to offer.

Relaxing the Sunday trading law is something to be concerned about, however. Mr Osborne also described the scheme as an ‘experiment’ from which the government ‘could learn things about trading’. There is growing belief, with rumours from inside parliament, that should the Olympic trading prove successful, then the laws could be scrapped completely.

Whilst this offers extra hours of retail for large companies, it does not vastly improve lifestyles for those in the UK.

Increased trading hours means that more people will have to be contracted to work Sundays. This will restrict relaxation time available in the weekend, both on personal and familial levels. With more people expected to be in work, there could be in fact a general reduction of shoppers, with people not wanting to spend extra time away from families and other activities, but the Olympics would mask this due to it being an anomaly event.

With no consultation on the matter, longer hours are bound to cause some disruption, but are already being assessed as a long-term plan by the government.

Comparing with European counterpart France, people are either lucky or in suburban Paris should their supermarkets and chains open more than 12 hours in a day; Sunday trading is even rarer. This thought is poignant as the 2012 Olympic bid finalists were London and Paris. France would not relax its laws for the Olympics, especially when they are cultural and religious. The nation just across the channel rests on nationalism and a sense of a day of rest for all.

The UK, however, has lost this perspective and continues to back longer hours and less respite time. Concerns have shifted from the personal and wellbeing, to material and capitalist gains. Only in reversing this trend can we see an increased national satisfaction. Happiness doesn’t come from shops, but in our time spent together.

For Whom the Road Tolls

Yesterday, Mr Cameron unveiled his latest masterstroke in a bid to ease the congestion that suffocates our transport systems like dull, London smog.

The PM called for an urgent readdressing of the nation’s road networks, suggesting improvement through an increase in the amount of private investment.

Without doubt, road investments, along with improvements to rail facilities, have been sparse and transportation networks no longer remain efficient means of commuting people and products to their destinations. Motorways in particular frequently reach saturation points and widespread jams are the norm around London, Birmingham and other metropolitan centres.

In Europe, many motorways have only two lanes and yet continue to carry their traffic with much less disruption than in the UK.

With a certain tenacity for issues under the umbrella of ‘infrastructure’, Cameron detailed the need for repair as urgent to combat “decades-long degeneration” and necessary in order to "build for the future with as much confidence and ambition as the Victorians once did".

Among the problems highlighted, environmental and economic issues were brought to the forefront: with increased delays, more fuel is burnt and deadlines are increasingly missed or deliveries received late.

It is estimated that some £7 billion a year is lost due to mismanaged and under-invested motorways.

However, the cost to the public is already rocketing because of these problems. As only grazed by the prime minister, more time spent in traffic jams and slowed motorways increases fuel consumption and combined with rising petrol prices, this ensures that more and more journeys are  costly for the consumer, requiring extortionate refills in motorway service stations. Asking for even more public contributions to right these problems is bound to cause an outcry of sorts.

Whilst privatisation then appears a reasonable measure (and something that all major government parties have considered in the past), how would this affect current motorists?

Indeed, many people may question the increasing sum payable for road tax if the schemes were implemented. With company and foreign investment becoming accepted, the tax would appear an unjust means of continuing to solve the nation’s debt crises. Since there is already no direct correlation between road tax to the government and parliament’s use of these funds on road investment, the hallmark of ‘road tax’ would merely become a phantom cloak for the government to claim addition state funds, without having to invest any amount of the sum back into the road infrastructure.

Besides, when privatising and adding tolls to roads, this incurs additional costs to families at a time of recession. Whilst the funds would generate new links for businesses, the average middle-class family may not be able to afford wide-spread highway men fees, to pardon the pun. The M6 toll, opened in 2003, remains an uncongested stretch of motorway because many families would rather save the £6 fee expected to use the stretch of road.

The stumbling block of these debates is that the British public hate privatisation and, with the water boards aside, there continues to be great resistance to any movement deemed to be taking power out of the hands of the British public.

Yet, the government could see forecasted figures of around £100 billion being injected into the chancellor’s funds by consequence of the move and therefore, it is rather popular to a cash-strapped Westminster.

However, with the prospect of foreign investment comes further concern. Many are sceptical as to how much investment would be pledged versus the amount of profit netted by the companies concerned; this a particular trouble after Cameron compared the schemes to water privatisation which saw massive profits for businesses.

Essentially, whilst investment is needed, there is no measure of how those in charge could be held accountable. As the prime minister insists there need be vision like the Victorians, the Englishmen of the late 19^th century would never have considered selling the country’s infrastructure in such a jigsaw manner, but rested on a sense of nationalism and pride that appears forgotten.

David Rathband, with respects.

On Wednesday night, police officers found PC David Rathband dead at his home in Northumberland.

Rathband, aged 44, suffered the loss of his sight following an attack by Raoul Moat in July 2010.

The gunman, who was on the run for shooting his ex-girlfriend and her partner, crept up on the policeman’s parked vehicle before opening fire at close range in an unprovoked attack, whilst the PC was unarmed.

Moat became the centre of a manhunt for an entire week in the summer of 2010, with claims that he could long last the search parties that eventually caught up with him due to army training.

Rathband, who was in the right place at the right time, doing his duty, had the course of his life irrevocably altered by the attack.

Speaking on Thursday, Prime Minister David Cameron described him as an "extraordinarily brave man" who did "an enormous amount for charity", before adding that he felt “desperately sorry for his family”.

Of course, Cameron may feel sorry for Rathband’s family as the officer announced he was separating from his wife last November.

Here, it is the collective failing of support groups to recognise the problems that Rathband was suffering. Despite being fitted with prosthetic eyes and doing a great amount of charitable work in the two years since the attack, Rathband remained, understandably, an angry and upset individual.

Recent remarks on his twitter account had provoked several figures to send their own virtual concerns, advocating that someone get help for the police officer.

However, their action went little further than a few characters on a social media network. Largely isolated then, Rathband is suspected to have taken his own life, with no other people being looked for in the police investigation on Thursday.

Is this surprising if the officer had been left alone by family members and few outside people, despite his large following online earned by his bravery, acted positively toward Rathband.

Former Labour Home secretary David Blunkett, himself blind since birth, said: "I am deeply saddened and I am worried about his wife Kath and his family. There was a man who was struggling inside as well as with the practicalities of coping with blindness. He was actually coping extremely well, but he didn't believe so.”

Who should be held responsible for the fragility of this officer? Moat, long since dead himself, is obviously a key figure in the apportioning of this blame, but he must be described more as a powder-keg in Rathbone’s actions. Instead, a society that held Rathband in such esteem from afar is damnable for not understanding, but instead merely framing and faming, a man undergoing huge changes to his daily life and beliefs.

His wife, undoubtedly in a position of shock, is sure to be feeling somewhat guilty, but this is no more her fault: having to deal with the repercussions of Moat’s attack herself.

Following the sentencing of Karl Ness and Qhuram Awan for assisting Moat last year, Rathband spoke out to describe how “These two individuals, along with the other coward who wasn't man enough to stay here, have taken my job from me.” Perhaps, these three, along with the ignorance of onlookers, have now taken his life too.

Perhaps this is an all the more important time to act, considering other victims of Moat, as his ex-girlfriend admitted she has considered suicide following July 2010's rampage.