The James Kilgour Blog

The Net is home to hundreds of millions of websites, ranging from Wikipedia, Google, Facebook, to the taboo, illegal, murky side of the Web.

Should the government be able to stop us accessing this content? What about Torrent sites etc? If the government has power to block any site it wishes, perhaps it will start blocking sites that are critical of it, that speak out negatively about new policy?

What is the limit? Could we start living in a Chinese-Communist society, where our internet is firewalled? I believe this is against our human and civil rights. We should have freedom of speech, and that means accessing any sort of web content that we wish to.

In Australia, the Government has asked the major ISPs to participate in a trial of filtering over 10,000 websites that are deemed to have illegal content on them.

Rightly so, Telstra, the largest ISP has denied this, and other ISPs are following suit. My worry is could we see the same sort of thing over here in the UK? Could we be monitored? 1984 may become 2009. I hope not.

JK

Halifax Bank of Scotland is one of the UK’s big four financial institutions, and whether separate or together, have been part of the highstreet for years. In fact, the bank holds 20% of all mortgages in the UK, and has millions of savers.

The events of the current economic climate though have caused unsteadiness, with the HBOS share price falling by more than three quarters.

But is a Super Bank a good idea for the UK? The new bank would have just under 40 million customers, with a 28% hold of the Mortgage market. (Under UK law, no financial institution is permitted to hold more than 25%.) The Bank would also have nearly 3000 branches, making it unmissable on the highstreet. 

The bank would offer unrivaled security, and would prevent collapse of HBOS, which if this were to happen could be devastating for the UK economy.

The bank would also have unrivaled financial powers, and would gain a controlling stake in the UK economy. However, with plentiful smaller alternatives,  I doubt it would really have an affect on the consumer.

JK

The Olympics was created in 1859 as an international sports game, with the aim of bringing together the world with one passion; Sports. Since then, the Olympics has visited hundreds of different countries, and the Olympic spirit has brought us all closer together.

Beijing 2008 begins soon, but for me, the communist Government of China breaches this very Olympic ethos. Despite their promises, Human Rights in China has still not improved as far as it should have done, and as for international openness, last night’s Panorama episode revealed how this is not true.

One poignant example is the Internet in China. Millions of sites are blocked, in what’s known as the Great Firewall of China. This plentifully list includes this Blog, the BBC News Website and any other site that is derogatory towards China or Chairman Mao.

China is no where near a democracy. People can’t express themselves, and if they are unhappy, no one will listen. Everyone remembers the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, where hundreds of peaceful protestors were murdered with tanks. This happened in Beijing itself, where the Olympic games will be, and continues to happen today, as more protestors are killed or tortured, when people don’t follow the rules.

The Sichuan earthquake in May caused a local school to collapse, killing hundreds of children. It was the only building to collapse, and poor building quality is suspected. However, due to local corruption, those who speak out are silenced. With force. How is this openness? How is this human rights?

I won’t be watching this year’s games. How can we celebrate sports achievement and the nation hosting it, when they corrupt the very fundamental pillars underpinning the Olympic Spirit. It makes a mockery of international cooperation and democracy. As for so called “democracy”, it’s little more than a dictatorship. How is everyone equal, when some, such as Chairman Mao are more equal than others?

You can watch the Panorama episode here. (Short time only!)

JK

Medicine is one of the most stressful careers out there. Not only do they have to deal with the pressure of treating hundreds of patients daily, but also the stress of getting something wrong and litigation.

Now the idea of testing doctors every few years on clinical skills is being thrown about, with the least efficient doctors being struck off. But is this fair? No. Doctors have to firstly get into Medical School, (which is extremely difficult), then train for 6 years, followed by another 5 years working as a foundation doctor.

How is it fair that they should then have to repeatedly be re-tested for the rest of their career; at a cost of 15 million! The NHS already claims poverty, and 15 million, in my opinion, could be much better spent.

JK