In a way, I'm quietly impressed by the sheer stupidity of some Conservative evangelicals in the Church of England who are threatening to leave the church if it consecrates women bishops.

It's impressive because it is so obviously illiberal, discriminatory and bigoted that it shows the Church of England to be the irrelevant and hugely diminished organisation it deserves to be and undoubtedly is.

God alone knows what the congregation of the Church of England makes of this sexist nonsense.

Tags — General Interest

Proving how I am always ahead of the zeitgeist, anticipating trends before they happen, and living up to my reputation of informing the politics of the future, I have just read Nudge.

I thoroughly enjoyed the first two sections, detailing how they do the sociological and psychological research which informs much of behavioural economics.

As ever, though, the descriptive parts of a book like this don't translate well into the analytical parts, and Thaler and Sunstein's application of their idea into policy areas left me feeling deflated: if this represents some of the most innovative thinking as to how governments address policy issues, we should all feel bereft.

The two conclusions I draw from reading Nudge are these: 1) Practices from the private sector, which make the most of the natural behaviour of human beings, should of course be imported into the public and voluntary sectors. No one sector has a monopoly on clever ideas or practices. 2) Nudge is (as the authors note) apolitical. Why it is only being appropriated by the Conservatives in the UK is a mystery to me; it's policy prescriptions (insofar as there are any) are about better governing, not better politics.

Tags — Literature, Politics, Society, Work

It is so rare a thing that I am prescient that I am going to make the most out of this.

I have noted several times (e.g. 1, 2) that the format of the debates will be a problem, and indeed that holding the debates at all is pointless. The News of the World today reports that the format of the leaders' debates still remains a very difficult thing to sort out in practice. Iain Dale notes the issues as well, and we'll see about 793 more posts on the matter between now and when the debates actually take place.

That the format of the debates would cause problems was self-evident. After all, the US has an entire Commission to sort those sorts of issues out.

That the content of the debates will be worthless will not be self-evident until after the debates themselves. I'll just have to write enough posts on the topic beforehand to ensure I can be suitably smug enough afterwards.

Tags — Politics

We like to cover the key issues here at arbitrary constant. Politicians swearing? We've got that covered. Application of planning laws to barmy farmers who try and hide their self-build castles behind hay stacks and tarpaulin? Right here. And, one from the history banks this, UKIP using European law to challenge a very British issue? We're happy to oblige.

To continue this high quality coverage, we're pleased to report that the frequency of the 343 bus - a stalwart for anyone familiar with the underground vacuum that is south east London - is to be increased. There are now going to be two extra 343s during the morning peak hour.

What's more, the scramble for seats on the 343 when at Elephant & Castle, in which normally decent people scrap like cage fighters after several beers, has been noticed and is the subject of representations to the bus company that runs the route.

Your loyal correspondent will update you on the results of this happy circumstance. In the meantime, any further news regarding bus routes in south east London will be relayed in due course.

Tags — Arbitrary Constant, General Interest

Last week's puzzle, courtesy of Wrighty, was as follows:

There is a closed room with a light in it. Outside, there are 3 light switches. You can flick any of the switches any number of times. You can only open the door and go into the room once. You know that the light is initially off. How can you determine which light switch operates the light?

The answer is as follows: Leave switch 1 alone. Flick switch 2 for 1 hour, then flick back. Flick switch 3. Now look. If the light is on, then the switch is 3, if the light bulb is warm, then switch 2, else switch 1.

Here's this week's puzzle, courtesy of Brainbashers:

Below are ten words which have been split in half. The first column has all of the starts and the second column has all of the ends. Can you pair the letters and remake the ten words?

BO AF
BR RE
FO NE
GO AF
HO KE
JO EW
LE IN
LO AM
LO MB
SO PE

Other links:

— My cat likes sausages

— History of Batman movie logos

— Make your own Malcolm Tucker poster (NSFW)

— Iraq Inquiry 2010: Proof That Tony Blair isn't bothered

— Chart of iPad Comparison Charts

— iSandwich 4G

— Damn this cheap Australian import...

— http://twitter.com/sniffpetrol/status/8624532556

— I think the moral of the story is to only steal non-iPhones

— http://www.takeaweirdbreak.com/

— The Abridged Atlas Shrugged

— Heckler Spray interview: Ricky Gervais

— Moment ago on Shoreditch High Street - how harsh is this?

— Ghostbusters inspiration?

— Vans and the places they were

— Speak with conviction

— Big Brother. Satellites orbiting Earth

Tags — General Interest

So what was it I saying about planning?

Another travesty has occurred as Hackney Council has agreed a planning application to demolish the Foundary. One of the few remaining original Hoxton establishments (along with the long since crap 333/Mother Bar), it occupied a special place in my heart, no doubt along with other Shoreditch Twats.

Developed on very much a DIY ethic with free art and performance space which has been home to the likes of Banksy and Gavin Turk, as well as a mass of other 'interesting shit' (I loved the mutilated dolls hanging from the ceiling), the end is now nigh.

As with the hay castle man, technically the correct planning decision has been made, as the Foundary only rented the space. Whilst its the same the world over with artist-led 'regeneration' quickly being replaced by commercially-led development (See Prenslauerberg in Berlin for another example), its massive shame that little or nothing is done to retain those places and establishments that first 'made' an area.

As the artist communities originally in Hoxton are now moving out to Dalston, Hackney Wick and Deptford it's imperative that local authorities act now to protect the integral parts of those areas, not only by listing conservation areas (as has correctly and unusually been done at the Wick) but by buying up space and providing subsidised artist accommodation, potentially in perpetuity. This will of course cost the taxpayer but one thing that usually unites locals in these areas (old and young) is the sadness they share when the physical and social landscape they valued changes beyond all recognition. When the Foundary goes, I'm many others like me will call it a day for Hoxton.

Tags — Society

I am a great believer in the need for a planning system in this country but I can't help but be mighty impressed by the cunning, ingenuity and determination of Robert Fidler. For the last four years he has hidden the house he (technically illegally) built behind hay bales and tarpaulin. Now the high court has ruled that because he lied to the council planning authority, he must knock it down.

Whilst it's probably the right legal decision and the building is really not to my taste, its a real shame that there cannot be more scope in the planning system for this kind of spontaneity, entrepreneurship and well...fun. We do need more homes and developers are not very good at delivering them at any decent rate, of a decent size and with any real panache or individuality. Self-build, whilst only ever a small part of the market, can play an important role, not necessarily in meeting targets but creating less homogenised neighbourhoods. And it should not just be for the (generally) well-endowed middle classes of Grand Designs.

My favourite ever Grand Designs was a couple of obviously modest means who converted a disused water pumping station (of similar) into their home, by means of sheer hard work and learning on the job. Can't think of something more appropriate thing for government to encourage its citizens to do, especially if it thought creatively about how to engage (especially youth) unemployed (not just in bricklaying but some more specialist trades, including 'low carbon/sustainable' jobs but also traditional artisan development trades) and to give new life to the small building company (housing is shockingly dominated by a few players).

Tags — Politics

For a while now, I have been following and impressed by Enabled by Design. The basic question that Enabled by Design asks is why should anybody who requires any form of assistive equipment to support them to live independently have to put up with stuff that looks like crappy hospital equipment?

The wider question that Enabeld by Design poses, of course, is one that relates to disability as a whole: why is disability — as an issue, a policy area, a debate — the poorer cousin of virtually every other area of public and private life? Why separate and not equal?

It's a debate typically overshadowed by more pressing issues (such as the basic quality of life that is denied a ridiculous number of disabled people). This is understandable. But one encouraging sign of the last 18 months or so is how disability is gaining traction amongst a small (but growing) number of people who understand the debate as being one that has to be set in the wider context of public services and society. This group understands that the disability debate necessarily has to involve everyone and not just disabled people. (In other words, 'separate but equal' cuts both ways. But that's for another time.)

If you have chance, please do check out Enabled by Design. In particular, if it's something you're interested in, the upcoming event — We are Enabled by Design: making design truly universal — would be a good time to get involved.

Tags — Equality, General Interest, Society, Work

[O]f course, I had to take this decision as Prime Minister and it was a huge responsibility then, and there is not a single day that passes by that I don't reflect and think about that responsibility, and so I should. But I genuinely believe that if we had left Saddam in power, even with what we know now, we would still have had to have dealt with him, possibly in circumstances where the threat was worse and possibly in circumstances where it was hard to mobilise any support for dealing with that threat.

I think we live in a completely new security environment today. I thought that then, I think that now. It is why I have said this to you a number of times today I take a very hard, tough line on Iran today, and many of the same arguments apply.

In the end it was divisive, and I'm sorry about that and I tried my level best to bring people back together again, but if I'm asked whether I believe we are safer, more secure, that Iraq is better, our own security is better with Saddam and his two sons out of power and out of office than in office, I indeed believe that we are, and I think in time to come, if Iraq becomes, as I hope and believe that it will, the country that its people want to see, then we can look back, and particularly our armed forces can look back, with an immense sense of pride and achievement in what they did.

[Do I have regrets?] Responsibility but not a regret for removing Saddam Hussein. I think that he was a monster, I believe he threatened, not just the region but the world, and in the circumstances that we faced then, but I think even if you look back now, it was better to deal with this threat, to deal with it, to remove him from office, and I do genuinely believe that the world is safer as a result.

— Tony Blair, giving evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry

Tags — Politics, Quotation of the week

Yesterday, I welcomed an apology from David Cameron on the topic of the repeal of Section 28.

Today, I abhor this from the same person:

The moment a burglar steps over your threshold, and invades your property, with all the threat that gives to you, your family and your livelihood, I think they leave their human rights outside.

Human rights are about balancing the rights of one person with those of another. Clearly, when a burglar enters someone else's house, they are breaking some of that person's human rights and should be punished accordingly.

But to say that someone leaves their human rights at the door is absurd. All you have to do is remind yourself that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has one article on the right to life (Article 3) and one on the right to a fair trial (Article 10) to see that.

Tags — Politics