Fund-raising for the NHS

The petition is entitled hold a fundraising night for the NHS and the explanatory notes say

"We raise alot of money for places abroad when WE need money to help us. I think we should have a night like the comic relief night to help the NHS which is in desperate need of money."

This is a very noble, at-first-glance-sensible plan. I admire the innovativeness. (Is that a word? My spell-checker thinks so ...)

The Official Red Nose Day website tells me that the 2007 Red Nose Day raised a whopping "£40,236,142 million" - but unfortunately, I think that's a lie. I think they've accidentally added an extra "million" there - the Wikipedia page about it only references £40,236,142, and that's in line with previous years' results, too.

So a very nice £40 million raised.

The Budget 2006 (warning, PDF file) says that in 2007-2008, annual spending on the NHS should be about £92 billion.

So the amount raised by Comic Relief is less than one-twenty-fifth of one percent - is four percent of one percent - of the cost of the NHS ...

So even leaving aside all the political implications of fund-raising for the NHS this way (it's rather contrary to how the NHS is supposed to be funded, after all - but at the same time, it's not new. For years I got my Christmas cards from the cancer unit that treated my grandmother, to help their fund-raising) unfortunately, it's hopelessly impractical.

I remember a quote, and I cannot think where from, that says something like: "Oh, for a beautiful day in the future when hospitals and schools can buy all the medicine and books they need, and the RAF and Army have to have bake-sales to buy guns". Of course, given the recent reports about ill-equipped soldiers in the gulf, we seem to have got the less-good bit of that without the good bit ...

Cumbria and Scotland

The petition is entitled Make Cumbria part of Scotland and the explanatory notes say

"So Scotland has direct control of Cumbria, Southern England does nothing for us"

I see the temptation. Truly I do. Goodness knows I know the feeling that the media is all London-centric and that we have far more in common, up here, with the Scots than the Londoners. And when one looks at the changes the Scottish Parliament have implemented (one thinks about student funding in particular) it has great appeal. Oh - I'm not in Cumbria, of course. But I don't think they're any different on that side of the country ...

Anyway. Lovely idea. Don't know if the Scots would want us, but it has lots of appeal. But it's never going to happen and it seems a little silly to waste time asking for it.

Modern Pillories

The petition is entitled Introduce Perspex Cases (Modern Pillories) within troubled communities instead of Asbo's and the explanatory notes say

"Display minor criminals and anti-social people in a perspex case (modern version of stocks or pillories)within the community they have offended in. Let it be safe, so they cannot be seriously harmed; but just humiliated in front of their peers. If they have harrassed an old couple - for example - let that old couple be the first to throw wet sponges at them (provided by the council/cheaper than a night in the cells). A security guard could be on site to prevent damage to the case and the person inside it. It will work better than Asbo's as no-one will want it repeated! Hard to see the acclaimed cudos on this one."

This petition makes my liberal principles flinch again but then I think - no, hang on - why do I think this would be a breach of human rights or some such thing? Why do I think it's a bad idea?

I suppose one has to raise the question of what a sentence is for: punishment, rehabilitation, deterrence, etc. Broadly speaking the concept of "punishment" bothers me somehow; I know this is unrealistic and unreasonable so I tend to just not think too hard about it. Certainly something like this pillorying is going to serve no rehabilitative purpose (well, I can't see how it can, anyway) - but then, the theory is that ASBOs and such aren't really for the easily-rehabilitated. And the petitioner may be on to something as far as deterrence goes.

It's probably madness. It sounds like some kind of dreadful reversion to the middle ages. And yet ... it's a curious idea ...

Binding Manifestos

The petition is entitled make the manifesto of political party a legally binding contract if they come to power and the explanatory notes say

"we all know how dodgy each party is, it's more a case of which one is least dodgy. Isn't it?"

This is a lovely idea. I've often thought so for students' union elections too, though in the case of the students' union manifestos, half the time the presidential candidates' manifestos promise mostly to do things the president doesn't have the power to do (the treasurer does), which would be a bit of a problem to bind people to.

It's never going to happen. But, oh, I wish it could!!

Energy Generation

The petition is entitled Promote and bring to fruition the world wide solution to all energy problems and the explanatory notes say

"No doubt wind and maritme energy have environmental benefits.

They are however contentious in terms of transforming local vistas, and their associated development costs, and should of course be continued.

Meanwhile, if you care to get out your old school atlas, observe that all around the equator (and many other areas of desert around the globe) are several million square miles of this planet that are neither inhabited or sustain much life.

They do though have the sun beating incessantly down on them every day.

It is not then that given this fact, that the possible building of infrastructure to collect and distribute this free power from our sun could well be one very important source of the worlds power requirements and dramatically help the climate change situation, and make energy costs low and available to all.

This is an actual acheivable reality."

My first thought was - hang on, have photovoltaic cells actually reached viable yet? As I commented on a previous petition (Environmental Building to be precise) I had a feeling they might cost more energy to produce than they can actually output. But I thought I should check the matter; once again I exhibit my faith in Wikipedia where I find the following paragraph:

"There is a common conception that solar cells never produce more energy than it takes to make them. While the expected working lifetime is around 40 years, the energy payback time of a solar panel is anywhere from 1 to 20 years (usually under five) depending on the type and where it is used (see net energy gain). This means solar cells can be net energy producers and can "reproduce" themselves (from just over once to more than 30 times) over their lifetime.

This is disputed, however, by some researchers who object that such analysis doesn't take into account waste, inefficiency, and related energy costs that would come with a real-world solar cell."

There are three references cited in the paragraph: a paper presented at "Solar 2002 Sunrise on the Reliable Energy Economy" by two Pennsylvania State University researchers; a leaflet from the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory and a 1997 paper published in Solar Progress from the Australia and New Zealand Solar Energy Society by a researcher from the University of New South Wales. In short, I am minded to believe that in fact PV cells can generate more energy than their base cost.

That doesn't, however, make this a completely viable proposal, necessarily. The big problem I see with it is the difficulty of transferring energy in the form of electricity. Or at all, actuall It's a horrifically inefficient process; the vast majority of the energy-use is a long way away from the putative locations of the energy-generation; in short, I'd have to do lots of complicated sums and research to work out how viable this would be, but it doesn't feel great offhand.

Oh, and there's a bit of my brain saying "I don't know much about geography and deserts and things, but doesn't the sand shift a lot? Aren't you going to be having to have some way of keeping the sand off the cells? Or something?" But I may be talking rubbish there.

Having said all that, there are ways and means around it, and of course one could draw it back to yesterday's mockery of the Mad Hydrogen Man. One potentially-efficient solution is to generate the electricity at the equator using solar cells, use that energy to split water and store hydrogen (OK, you have to transport the water there, presumably, which is going to cost more energy), then transport the hydrogen to where the electricity's needed and use it to generate electricity there.

I had basically this conversation with some people at a Go tournament a few months ago (as you do) and I think the conclusion of assorted reasonably knowledgeable people was that this was the efficient way to do things. Probably.

Of course, if I were the impoverished countries who own these bits of land (or rather sand) I'd charge the first world a fortune in rent - a well-calculated fortune, I suppose, so as to not put them off, but if they'd decided to go for it I'd want to make jolly sure my people benefited too.

Perhaps this petition isn't mad after all. I should probably do the sums properly. All the data's available. But I'm not quite that bored at the moment.

The maddest thing about it is also the saddest thing about it - even if it is a viable idea, it's a long-term plan requiring lots of initial investment, and there's no hope of the short-termist politicians we have (here and in the rest of the first world) actually going for such a thing.

Prison Waiting Lists

The petition is entitled Introduce Prison Waiting lists for convicted ciminals and the explanatory notes say

"Prison overcrowding should be regarded as a temporary measure to be addressed through investment in prisons. Existing Prisoners should not be released early and the appropriate sentence should always bee given and not downgraded simply because of a shortfall in prison spaces. Where the offence warrants a prison term, and where appropriate, the offender should be released into the community until such time as a cell is available for them. It is not always necessary that sentence is carried out immediately. It works for the NHS, it can work for prisons."

This is a fascinating idea. Notwithstanding my liberal views (I suspect prison of being pointless as a punishment and not worth much as a deterrent; I also am unconvinced that justice involves punishment anyway; in short, the value of prison is only to keep away from society those who are likely to re-offend against it) which I know the world doesn't share - why not?

OK, clearly you are going to have a problem keeping tabs on the convicted so that they don't escape and disappear before their sentences come up. But given tagging and modern technology I don't think that's insoluble. Clearly there's also the risk of their re-offending - but again, tagging, perhaps, could solve this. There's ways around it, anyway.

Somewhere along the line this seems to me strangely plausible. Mad, in many respects, and yet ... plausible.

Scrapping and Creating Laws

The petition is entitled Make Parliament scrap two old laws before introducing any new one and the explanatory notes say

"In the last ten years, Parlament has introduced about 4,000 new ways for us to fall foul of the law. There are far too many outdated laws, rules and regulations for a free country. Let's scrap two for each new one introduced, we won't miss them!"

This is a fascinating idea.

It's manifestly impractical - you'd never get them to agree to it in the first place, let alone on what they should scrap - but astonishingly appealing.

Live on an Average Wage

The petition is entitled live on an average wage and the explanatory notes say

"he is allowed £20,000 for the whole year and he is not allowed to use tax payers money at all apart from national/international reasons which should be decided by the public vote."

Good idea. Not convinced by the execution, but good idea. I'd have thought that rather than having to vote on the use of taxpayers' money for national reasons one would need a simpler system, for one thing. And for another it would be quite useless for just him to be on this kind of income, given Cherie's income (I assume, anyway). But it's a lovely idea.

Online Voting and ID Cards

The petition is entitled introduce online voting in tandem with the introduction of the UK ID card scheme and the explanatory notes say

"I object to the introduction of the unpopular yet inevitable UK ID card scheme. However, this promised "secure" scheme should allow online voting through a secure internet connection. Should the majority of the UK, ID card-holding electorate sign an e-Petition it shall be introduced as law or be adopted as policy. Repeatedly this government has chosen to ignore the will of its people who they represent and serve. The people of the UK deserve a reactive government that is in accord with the electorate."

I agree, very strongly, with the sentiments expressed by the petitioner - in that the ID card scheme (and most particularly the little-mentioned NIR "database" associated with it) is utterly reprehensible, insecure, not going to achieve what it's claimed to be for, etc., etc. I could write a very pretty rant.

On the other hand, I don't see how the scheme can provide a secure way of voting online. At least, it could be made to, I think, but not as it's proposed. And if it were possible, I'd be more interested in seeing it being used for actual online voting in elections than e-Petitions, which as I've discussed before in the blog post entitled "Referendum" would need to be properly written and so on ... anyway, this is an Interesting Idea and I am Thinking About It.

Common Sense

This petition is entitled create a 'common sense' law, which overrides all other laws and the explanatory notes say

"We live in a society where people will sue anyone over anything.

I propose a common sense law. This law will override all other laws.

eg. If someone is breaking in to your house, and should suffer an injury, they should not be able to sue you. Common sense.

If you're stopped at a red light, and an ambulance/police car/fire engine comes up behind you, sirens and lights on, you should not be fined for moving through the red light so that they can pass you. (Common sense would also dictate that you make sure it is safe to move through the red light.)

I love this idea. It feels like such a great idea.

Only what's common sense, exactly? One man's pearl is another man's poison, and what I think is common sense someone else calls loony leftism and what they think is common sense I call raving Toryism.

It's a marvellously appealing idea, though.

Weekend Prisons

The petition is entitled Weekend Prisons and Holidays and the explanatory notes say

"Prisons are full often with people who should not be in prison full time. We need to look at alternatives to full time prisons. We would like to see the introduction of Weekend and bank holiday prison for thos in employment and in full time education. If a person has committed an offence and it is proven he/she are in full time employment it would be better for the country if they only attended prison in their time off i.e weekends and Bank holidays. This would keep those in employment still in the work force and earning money to look after their families and also to pay taxes. These in education would be monitored to ensure they were not abusing the system and if they were they would then be sent to a main prison."

This petition raises some interesting questions, really, about the purpose of prison. If it's intended as punishment, perhaps this theory might work. If, on the other hand, it's about protecting society from possible re-offending, then ... well ... this doesn't look so clever.

I wonder how many of the weekend-imprisoned would manage to actually remain in employment? If I were an employer of one of them I'd probably be looking hard for a reason to sack them.

Time for a new category/tag: Curious ideas. Mad, but curious, you understand. Thought-provoking.

Referendum

The petition is entitled Call a Referendum on petitions with over 75,000 signatures and the explanatory notes read

As the policies of the 2 major parties continue to mirror each other, we are left with little choice every election.

If a petition raises enough votes it should be put to a public vote and then implemented by our politicians.

Lets have multiple democractic votes rather then 1 vote for bundles of the same policies.

This is an astonishingly appealing proposal. I know it's my students' union background speaking that makes this feel like a fantastic idea. I know there are all sorts of flaws. But, in principle, it Feels Good. Not, admittedly, the 75k, per se. That is, after all, only about 0.125% of the UK's population, so doesn't seem enough, to me. There's only one petition above that level on the site as I write this (it's about inheritance tax), but referenda are expensive and complicated and I'd want them to be more unlikely. Then there's the fact that most of the petitions are worded so badly that making a referendum of them would be impossible - though, of course, the badly worded ones are less likely to get many votes.

Still, this idea appeals to me. I'm not signing it, not yet, but I'm flagging it for me to think about. (It's got a year to run. I've got time to think.)

(I'm tagging it "sensible". Perhaps I should be tagging it "mad but appealing", but until and unless more such petitions show up, "sensible" will do ...)