Ben Elton and Privacy

I used to think Ben Elton was great - I loved his anti-Thatcher rants. Time passed and I felt he became a sell-out, and I questioned whether he was just saying that stuff for effect. I found his collaboration with Lloyd-Webber a repulsive idea and the subject in poor taste.

Tonight I heard him on Radio 4 doing a fabulous old-style rant in favour of privacy, and against stuff like Facebook.

Interesting, as I recently received my second invitation to join Facebook. I have joined, but not using my real name. Neil Harding (and a few others) would no doubt call me a paranoid Luddite for this, but the idea of voluntarily entering a load of personal data together with data connecting me with a whole range of people (friends and friends of friends etc) isn't one I relish.

Beyond that, Facebook raises some interesting questions. I contacted the first friend who invited me to join some time ago. I explained that I was now a member, and we could be friends; but there was a problem. She wouldn't be my friend because I hadn't used my real name. It got worse, the friend who introduced me noticed I'd joined a Facebook group called "I want to punch June Sarpong in the f****ing face". He took exception and didn't really want to be associated with anyone who was a member of such a group.

I left that group because I want to continue the Facebook experiment and I don't want to fall out with the one "friend" I have on there; anyone who knows me knows full well I wouldn't punch anyone in the face ever and that I just find June Sarpong annoying (along with a whole list of other celebs including but not limited to Shane Ritchie, Chris Moyles and the late Ned Sherrin).

I haven't decided what I make of this Facebook thing yet - I'm waiting and exploring a bit - but so far, two out of two friends have told me what I have to do to be their friend on it. Doesn't seem a great start so far.

Two Worlds Collide

Well, they do in my mind, at least. This morning I was reading about the poor old non-doms who will have to leave Britain if the chancellor makes them pay tax. I really must stop reading the Daily Telegraph in the mornings just because I know where to get a free copy.

For the record I really couldn't care less if a load of extremely wealthy tax-avoiders clear off to Switzerland. They pay little or nothing in tax so we won't lose anything.

Anyhow, it seems I'd better watch it, because wealthy folk who don't like what you have to say about them have high powered lawyers (I am really trying to get around my loathing of their filthy trade). These people send a letter to your service provider and they take down your website.


I am not in any way suggesting that people should be free to publish libelous comments - but the matter hasn't been tested in any court - all that has happened is that some lawyers wrote a letter.

Sadly (in a way) what this shows is that you're safer having a big business host from the USA than buying from a small local provider.

It isn't envy - I'd just like it if normal rules couldn't all be swept aside by a stack of cash.

Sir John Bourn

I've been following revelations about the former high spending head of the National Audit Office with Interest. On the one hand, I'm reminded of Noel Coward's autobiography in which (and I'm paraphrasing) he suggests one should travel first class if one has the money.

The thing that sticks in my craw is that it isn't his money; it's mine! Not only that but the tax that became due on the benefit received by his wife of such luxury travel was also paid for by me - and probably you.

None of this is in any way as bad, however as the fact that these fat cats have been accepting lavish corporate hospitality. That can't be right surely?

Details here

Why ID cards are dangerous

Not for the first time someone has put forward the arguments against ID cards in a much better way than I can.

I read the comments and there were a few of the usual "if you've nothing to hide" ones. Let's just be clear - I have nothing to hide - yet - but I also don't expect the government to think it has the right to steal my identity and licence it back to me.

Neil has a point - on this

I'm quick to point at Neil and complain at the worst excesses of his authoritarian jack boot tendency - but on the issue of electoral reform he makes some excellent points.

It's only fair to say so.

Hanging's too good

I try to be charitable - honestly. I try to imagine that the irritating shouty woman using her mobile phone as an impromptu megaphone on the overcrowded train today (of which more later) isn't just a worthless piece of scum.

I try to think how Derek Conway could be viewed with anything other than contempt.

I cannot, however, but think that the bloke driving the lorry in this episode, is, in my not very humble opinion, an utter, utter, pillock. Just because he couldn't be bothered to drive his lorry properly, a train driver was injured and thousands of people's plans were, and continue to be, totally messed up.

I suppose I should consider the possibility that something went wrong with his lorry - in my view that would be the only valid excuse for being so crap and causing people to be injured, late, out of pocket and generally disrupted.