At the heart of the industrial
revolution, there was one machine that literally took the country in new
directions.
The advent of the railways
allowed a vast amount of the country to be opened up and accessed for the first
time for those from different regions and facilitated a nationalising of the
British public themselves: all coming together: working, changing and shaping
the face of the modern UK.
As a student at the centre of the
UK, I see myself in a prime position to utilise and exploit the services
available. However, it now appears this gateway is gradually closing itself
off; no longer are the trains a viable means of transportation and the
resultant problems are bountiful.
Amidst growing concerns over the
spiralling costs for HS2 – the high speed rail link between London and
Birmingham, and hopefully beyond – the issue of cost of carriage has once again
reared its head.
Transport Secretary Philip
Hammond acceded that trains are “a rich man’s toy” to MPs in Westminster
earlier this week.
Faced with numerous questions
over the quality and development of the railway system and how it will fare in
the future, the transport secretary stated concerns not only for British
commuters post-High Speed 2, but admitted that "Uncomfortable fact number
one is that the railway is already relatively a rich man's toy - the whole
railway.”
The government has recently
changed how it calculates for rail journeys.
For several years, increases were
implemented on the basis of inflation plus 1%, however this increment has now
risen to plus 3%.
Whilst many railway sector groups
have cried out at the statement, this is an issue with which a great many
people have long since taken umbrage. Unless one is to know and confirm all
appointments approximately 8 weeks in advance, charges to the capital in the
south are phenomenally extortionate. An average purchase just a week before for
a single from Manchester to London could cost around £50: this being more at
peak morning times.
In addition, this ensures that
many journeys are being more economical to fund via car.
Considering that a great many of
the country’s largest cities are attempting to promote greener lifestyles and
lay on more efficient public transport services, the continued viability of the
car over the train simply mocks councils’ efforts. With the surge in numbers of
people that live further from work, the increased consumption of petrol will of
course stain the environmental pledges in a poor light.
Moreover, the cost of running
such inefficient services is only highlighted all the more by the way in which
people are forced to avoid the train. Catch 22 is that with fewer services,
people will complain about lack of choice, but with the mounting costs of a
large fleet, there are not adequate enough ticket ranges to compete and expand
the market for all those who might enjoy it.
Stephen Joseph, of the Campaign
for Better Transport described fares as 'eye-watering', and pointed out that
“Far from being simply 'a rich man's toy' trains are also vital for many of
those on more moderate incomes who need to get to work.”
So it is that the train, a
British invention, must look abroad to systems such as the TGV for inspiration
as to how to deliver a more efficient and affordable model. Since ministers are
already fumbling over the High Speed Links, not due to be in service until 2018
at the earliest, there is concern that the country will once more be shut from
itself compared to its European counterparts.
Failure to review, reform and
revolutionise could spell the apocalypse of the treasure of British transport.
At least these station users have something to smile about.
With a certain self-rapture,
Margaret Thatcher probably regards the latest developments in the news with a
certain feel of justification.
Yesterday saw the formal
announcement of circulating rumours: that a large number of unions are
proposing planned strikes over the coming winter months, all calculated so as
to hit the average person, and more importantly the government, with the full
force of worker strength.
Four of the largest unions that
operate across the UK have already commenced with their balloting. In order to
fully plan the events and gage the level of support, each of Unison, Unite, GMB
and the Fire Brigades’ Union are starting to draft plans and provide further
information so as to ensure a co-ordinated strike action. Adding to the
severity of this issue, a further ten unions may consider joining the action
according to reports from TUC boss, Mr Brendan Barber.
Such foresight in synchronisation
allows a monopolising of major industries and response units: in turn
paralysing Britain.
Amongst those likely to strike,
disruption comes from nurses, teachers, fire crew services, as well as a great
many other skilled professions. Crippling Britain in this way affects all
branches of life: ensuring need for extra vigilance in case of emergency,
childcare worries and impact on wages earned for the period.
Powder-keg to the sudden outcry
is talks regarding changes to pension schemes. Government proposals wish to
introduce a revamp to the current system from next April so as to reflect on
the growth and sustainability of an elderly generation. With a unanimous vote
against the action from TUC, plans to engage a fight back were quickly moved to
the forefront so as to have the public voice manifest itself for the
government.
Mr Barber promised that the 30th
November would bring "the biggest trade union mobilisation for a
generation".
With the prospect of such
widespread disruption, some may wonder why we have need of trade unions. The
answer, in brief, is that a great many privileges and rights were fought,
gained and now protected by their bargaining work. Gaining prominence in the
Industrial Period, these unions have helped ensure fair wage, safe working
conditions and benefits.
This latest sequence of actions
is thus but a continuation of a dedicated group of committee members. Certain
citizens may see the unions themselves as wasting money in providing a service
that the individual should defend themselves.
Mrs Thatcher could not support
such a notion further. Many of the rebellions and riots that cloud her era of
power are stained with the taste of union blood.
Continuing to live up to this
Tory pragmatic, Chancellor George Osborne branded the proposed movement
"deeply irresponsible".
It is simple logic that there
must be a reform and revolutionising of the pension schemes in place so as to
fully support the mass increase in the over 60 populous. However, such a level
of backlash is undoubtedly unprecedented given the need to overhaul the current
system or risk jeopardising economic recovery in the long-term due to benefit
commitments.
Osborne reasoned that "The
offer on the table is for public sector pensions that are far better than most
in the private sector and fairer to taxpayers." and stubbornly rebuked
action as contradictory to the benefits of the country.
Interestingly, Ed Miliband,
representing the Labour party, has made decisive comments against the action
too. Trade Unions are occasionally referred to as ‘Labour Unions’ due to the
high level of pragmatic and practical similarities. I have heard joke before
that a Labour MP’s speech at a Union conference is almost like the best man
speech of a wedding; this being the esteemed level of comradeship.
However, Mr Miliband has
distanced himself from strike discussions whilst talks are still continuing,
yet despite his best efforts, he has acceded into stating that he would prefer
there not to be any strikes, citing a previous effort in June as “a mistake”.
Risky territory for the coalition
government, Labour needs support from union officials to remain at full
influence as the party can be quite reliant on cash from the union leaders. In
addition, with some sympathetic Lib Dem MPs, it is divisive to the ruling party
in Westminster.
Political repercussions could be
just as severe as economic impact.
Winter blues then are sure to
whistle disruption along for many British, with The GMB's Brian Strutton
advocating: "not [just] a day out and a bit of a protest. We're talking
about something that's long and hard and dirty as well, because this is going
to require days of action running through the winter, through into next year. "
At least Maggie won’t be losing
her four hours of sleep over the issue.
When indie rockers The Kooks
burst onto the scene with the angsty and infectious ‘Naïve’ back in 2006, the
band received critical acclaim, with the release going on to sell millions.
Whilst the second offering from the band a couple of years later shot to the
number one spot, this was later attributed to the reputation and premise of the
first lash of material. In an attempt to repeat the formula, Konk was soon
perceived as a dry and uninspired copy of its predecessor: the rockier songs
had less kick, the sing-alongs had less cheer.
With great disappointment then, I
read early reviews of Junk Of The Heart,
that indicated the album was to be, at best, average.
Having hidden themselves away in
some obscure location for several months, this album was to be a return to form
for a group who has now suffered line-up changes and severe delays to
production.Critics however gear
negatively towards the offering claiming that “[The album] is a series of
half-formed, indifferently performed tracks” [Andy Gill, Independent], or mock
the group as “boys next door who've got hold of a guitar and some Beatles wigs”
[Caroline Sullivan, Guardian].
After listening, we can all
breathe a sigh of relief: the donned Beatles wigs, per se, are rather of the
experimental type, and those who regard the album in such an unfavourable light
have obviously missed the depth and showcased talent in the new hash.
True, nothing on this album
stands out as ‘She Moves In Her Way’ as a summer anthem, nor does it excite
rebellious teenagers: but then this album is a passage to adulthood for the
band; songs featured are troubled and tinged with first regrets and a desire to
regain youth.
In fact, the third effort is a
spine-tingling showcase that plays like an extended version ‘Seaside’,
vulnerable and lonely, crossed with an apathetic ‘Ooh La’ (forgotten gems of
their debut).
Opener ‘Junk of the Heart
(Happy)’ echoes the group’s efforts in reacquainting themselves with their
diverse influences. Twisting a sixties swing element, the track amply denotes
the guitarist skill within the band, alternating between the relaxed acoustic
sounds and the heavier and darker breaks of the electric guitar. Throw in the
warbling of lead Luke Pritchard, which was the original source of the band’s
uniqueness, and there is established a real sense of melancholy. This blurring
of the boundary between positive and negative haunts the album throughout, and
separates it from other indie albums in its quest to revive 60s, 70s and even
80s mainstream.
Should Beatle wigs be uptaken in
such numbers as the softly reminiscent ‘How’d You Like That?’ they are only for
influence and quickly shook off. Rather than a quirky throwaway pop track of
love, the sound shifts to tribulation and trepidation. Elsewhere, David Bowie
masks are simply skin deep in ‘Runaway’ and ‘Mr Nice Guy’, both alternating
dark synths with scathing lyrics: obsession of “Seeing your name on the wall
again” in the first, played against the deceit of “Believing in things that
don’t believe in you”.
Tracks such as ‘Rosie’, wherein
the band are prophetically “followed by the same old cloud again”, and
‘Petulia’ highlight the loss of innocence for the band: love’s fragility and
hurt consuming “Be careful with me”. These sentiments are best framed by short
‘Taking Pictures of You’, which merits every moment an individual showcase of
both beauty and disgrace.
Regarding the arrangements and
instruments that grace the album, there has been some consideration in how to
best achieve this revival feel. Credit should be given to the ethereal use of
strings in ‘Time Above The Earth’, introducing a stripped back approach that is
rarely used in the genre. Lead single ‘Is It Me?’ almost strays into drum n
bass territory before switching abruptly to moody 70’s rock ‘n’ roll. A
smattering of synths offers a dark edge to many a track; the contrast and clash
between the guitars and electronica is to unsettle the listener and reaffirm
the changing and unstable emotions and feelings in each piece.
Incorporating such a plethora of
influences however means there is a hard balance to achieve. Whilst The Kooks
should be praised for their indie stamp on some classic 80s sounds which takes
a main segment of the album, the straying inclusion of 60s swing and post
millenium drum almost sounds unconsidered in its measure.
Arising from this problem is that
none of the tracks offer the simple happy Brit pop that featured on the first
two albums. Whilst this is an interesting expansion into other territories,
perhaps there has been too wide an area covered too thinly.
With this in mind, it is easily understood how Natalie Shaw, and many others, mistook lack of
direction for scribblings: “[The album is] just a messy selection of meandering
verses that surely can’t be the product of three years’ work.” [Natalie Shaw,
BBC]. However, each track has some reference point to a dark experience: a
regret, a mistake, a love lost. The meandering verses serve as a mental
riddling of whether the right or wrong was done.
In fact that a majority of the
individual pieces lifted from this album is not going to storm any mainstream
chart in a hurry is true testament to the quality of the Brindie Pop to be
enjoyed.
A spectre is haunting the world.
A spectre that hangs on a global scale.
Just one decade ago, as the
shadow of one structure fell from the Manhattan skyline, another erect itself
in its place. Greyer than its predecessor, this new structure threw a dark hue
over New York, America and the world.
Over the course of an
intermittent ten years, the word terrorism has come to take a prevalent place
in the life of many in the Western World. Those who are now coping with the
legacy of 9/11, the so called 9/11 generation, live in a domain where attack
comes in any form at any time, in order to strike fear into the civilised
fronts of Europe, America and Asia.
Essentially, we live amidst the
largest battle of ideologies since the Cold War.
Now, as in the period that saw a
stalemate of superpowers, many people wonder whether today will be one that
sees their daily life thrown into chaos. When once a battle was something that
happened away from public view, not only is it now an inherent part of the
media and our daily life, but it could impact personally. Whether friend,
family member or threat to self, with attacks on trains in Spain, airports in
Glasgow and tube systems in London, the shocking increase in the frequency, ingenuity
and scale by which these terror threats manifest themselves means that peace is
on hold.
Segregation is the first and most
evident effect on society. Many Muslims in America recount the weeks and months
and even years following the devastating attacks on the country that
essentially left them without identity. Belonging to a community that took
credit for the death of almost 3,000 people, these American citizens became
shunned.
Some claim that their livelihoods
were threatened, others lost jobs and racial insensitivity ensued with the rise
of misunderstanding and hatred.
One day has come to personify an
entire religion and cross section of society, without room for their defence.
Recently in France, there has
been a ban on the burka in public places and those with professional careers.
The French government advocates that this move is to enable people of all
faiths to come closer, eliminating a potentially boundary between social
groups. Others remain indignant and see it as a source of racism. Elsewhere, as
the clean-up from riot torn Britain continues, there are a select number who
laid blame on social divisions between ethnic minorities. These fragments that
have broken away from daily society trace routes to problems established on
that September morning in 2001.
Although subsequent wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan have played out on a different continent, the psychological
effects reach further. For those who know any serving member of the army, each
day is a blessing, as no news is good news. Establishing Middle East war zones
sets up a dichotomy by which there is a comfort that there is justice for the
innocent people that lost their lives, yet the dangers of antagonism,
overthrowing illusive figures and daily bombings adds to death tolls.
More importantly on home fronts,
with Wootton Bassett ending its tour of duty as representative for those
fallen, an entire town is bearing responsibility for public grief one last
time. Across the Atlantic, one prison has become so intertwined with the myth
of Army brutality in the name of public safety that there is a passive
acceptance to its morals.
These are the truths of life post
9/11. Initial reactions to a plane hitting the North Tower were the cries of a
tragic accident. Barely 15 minutes later, all such nativity and good nature was
lost not only from those who lived in New York, but gradually across America
and later Europe.
News channels now do not hesitate
to question whether some unidentified disruption is the cause of a terrorist
attack. Until September 2001, there would have largely been questions that came
before this: what was known of the problem, or what were the authorities doing,
or whether there would be a state of normality resumed soon?
Now: Is it a terrorist attack?
Who claimed responsibility? What could have been done?
For all the expectations of
attacks that are now a constant worry of the average person, still each extravagant
declaration of a problem with a nation comes as a surprise. What did we learn
from 9/11? Extremists still managed to successfully detonate a bomb in Spain.
English police forces had tips of an upcoming attack on Underground facilities
and yet services remained unprepared in the event.
Norway, the latest victim,
disbands the belief that only countries of certain proficiency and status on a
global front are targets. Although only the actions of one man, the ripples of
this double attack are testament as to how far social divisions are at a play
on a global scale.
The worry is that such divisions
are irreconcilable and beliefs incompatible.
From the ashes of ground zero,
the ashes of dead businessmen and women, should instead rise a beacon of hope
and a dedication, a pledge, that never again should deaths of innocent people
be the bi-products of hatred.
However, this can never be the
case if there remains a volatile system that constantly refers to broken social
groups and minorities as outsiders.
Following 9/11, the role of the
media should be to focus on stories and occasions wherein there has been a
coming together, a conglomeration, of different segments of society. We all
bear a responsibility to accept, understand and recognise the rights of
individuals and groups and their ways of life.
Instead, in film, in press and on
radio, the reverberated sound is one of hatred and denial. Hollywood has cashed
in on a priceless tragedy. Blockbuster releases, such as ‘World Trade Centre’
and ‘Flight 93’,
do not aid the public memory of the attacks on America. Rather they are
demeaning to American citizens, whose lives were cut short, doing their jobs.
In the press, we seek to lay blame solely on those in the East and quickly
forget the role the West has played in previous decades; supplying arms and
choosing sides is but all forgotten amongst the chaos.
Somewhat with bad taste, the
humorous ‘4 Lions’ mockuments the plans of 4 would be terrorists. Despite the
comedy film, it is this ironic take on something so serious that has a relaxed
stance taken by public officials. If we are able to laugh in the face of
adverse terror, why should we prevent it?
Media outlets are the voice of
the 9/11 generation. Their function should be to allow a communication between
those victims of attacks, to ease their pains and to bring society together.
A spectre of terror haunts the
modern world. Whilst it is a unifying spirit, it is simultaneously a spirit of
terrible trepidation and divisive deeds. Since its inception, this ghost of
fear has served to make one group a scapegoat and one group a leader of peace.
It lingers to separate world populous into those who are would be victims of
terror and those who incite terror.
Instability abound, the Western
world finds itself precariously balanced: for with power comes a duty of care.
If it is to lead nations from the threat of external invasion, it firsts need
look within and proactively protect its citizens.
9/11 serves as an unheeded
warning. Most remain unprepared for an attack and many remain ignorant of the
country and customs of those being invaded. The media breaches its own duty in
not being a reliable source of information.
No longer can terrorism be swept under the rug: it is public domain.
Currently, the Manhattan skyline
is dominated by the spectre that stands at 1,368 ft. Soon, it will be joined at
that height by World Trade Centre 1, or Freedom Tower. With Freedom comes the
hope that the current ideology of terror will be washed by the waters of the
fountain that circle the Twin Tower base: otherwise, there will progress a
stalemate of fear, a waiting game of attack and consequence.
