.jpg)
Photo by Christian Guthier
I agree with almost everything said in the post, but there's a fundamental problem with Ed Miliband leading the UK's fight on climate change.
He's too damn nice!
I can hardly find a bad word to say about him, unless I shut my eyes and think of Kingsnorth. He "gets it" in a way that so many of our elected representatives don't. He "gets it" in a way that John Prescott never did, although Prescott seems to be making up for lost time. (And by the way, listening to him on the radio the other morning brought back warm memories as I got to scream "bullshit!" as I was getting dressed.)
Miliband is reasonable, thinks things through, and actually takes the time to talk to the "green lobby". If you're an environmental protester, then how can you protest against a guy who says the same things you do?
So I'm going to be nitpicky. Flesh Is Grass points us towards Ed's Pledge, where we can sign up to support Ed at Copenhagen. I was scratching my head wondering what the real aim of it was. Surely Ed doesn't need a whole load of signatures of people who are backing him? He'll be speaking for the country.
Then I noticed this line:
The Labour Party and its elected representatives may use the data you have supplied
Ed, you have my wholehearted support at Copenhagen (provided you push for as much as you can get and don't take no for an answer). But I ain't signing your pledge just to fill Labour's databanks.
4 comments:
"just to fill Labour's databanks"
It's definitely good to be cautious, but I'm comfortable with this.
I'm interested in your worries though - what are they?
My first question was...why? Why does Ed need people to sign a pledge? To what purpose? Is he going to walk around Copenhagen with a print-out of the signatures?
My second question was...why? Why does the Labour Party need these details? Why did it feel the need to warn us? Okay, that might just be standard operating procedure and the only person who will use the information will be Ed, but still I found myself uneasy that they were even asking for personal details. And I'm the kind of person who quite happily will sign an online petition.
Perhaps it's just a knee-jerk reaction to a government wanting my details.
Here's what ran through my head:
Ah, Ed's making a pledge.
Huh, he's been moaning on about the environmentally-committed's collective failure to engage the silent majority for months.
Yes, he can have my email address and contact me about this at a later date.
Yes, he can have my address so he can see where his pledge's supporters live, and be reassured that they are unique.
I don't do online petitions, as a general rule (rarely find one I can responsibly sign, and there was a fantastic recent Radio 4 documentary which raised more problems with them) but Eds Pledge looked to me like simply letting an elected representative know that you are behind his stated intentions.
Go on, support Ed's Pledge. He needs it.
I do agree it's good to be cautious about giving out your details. But this is the government which brought in Data Protection and Freedom of Information.
Here's what ran through my head:
Ah, Ed's making a pledge.
Huh, he's been moaning on about the environmentally-committed's collective failure to engage the silent majority for months.
Yes, he can have my email address and contact me about this at a later date.
Yes, he can have my address so he can see where his pledge's supporters live, and be reassured that they are unique.
I don't do online petitions, as a general rule (rarely find one I can responsibly sign, and there was a fantastic recent Radio 4 documentary which raised more problems with them) but Eds Pledge looked to me like simply letting an elected representative know that you are behind his stated intentions.
Go on, support Ed's Pledge. He needs it.
I do agree it's good to be cautious about giving out your details. But this is the government which brought in Data Protection and Freedom of Information.
Post a Comment