RSS Feed     Twitter     Facebook

Posts Tagged ‘Britain’

Green Britain Day is a PR distraction

Greening Britain is a serious goal that requires a vision underpinned by real policies with meaningful outcomes

I’d like to declare today to be Greenwash Day. To celebrate that relatively modern phenomenon of companies trying to sell themselves as being rather greener and more ethical than they really are. Today would be an apt day, it is after all – Green Britain Day. Where’s the Greenwash in that? Oh, where to start.

Green Britain day comes to us courtesy of EDF. That’s Electricité de France to give them their full name. EDF is a state-owned French nuclear power company. They are also the world’s biggest corporate producer of nuclear waste, one of the biggest traders and burners of coal, and have a tiny tiny fleet of windmills (0.7% of their generation). And to promote this campaign they’ve “borrowed” (as Fred Pearce gently puts it) someone else’s logo – the green union flag. This flag symbolises two things: care for the environment and British identity. EDF can claim, of course, neither.

This really does take greenwash to a whole new level. It could almost be the plot of a farce. If it wasn’t for the fact that EDF is seriously intent on convincing us in Britain that it – and nuclear energy – are green and good for Britain.

Stealing someone else’s clothes is not a new tactic in the world of dirty big business. And neither is greenwash.

A few years ago the UK witnessed “fairwash”, where years of pioneering work on the concept of Fairtrade were swamped by a tidal wave of big-budget corporate lookalike schemes. Everybody and their brother now has a version of Fairtrade. It might be tempting to say where’s the harm in that, the more people doing it the better. Well yes, if they truly are doing it, I would agree. But that’s not how this usually goes down. When big brands move into the ethical arena it’s for the kudos, to look like a better company, to follow a new trend and gain sales – it isn’t for the cause, it’s for their cause, which is of course to make money and to add “shareholder value”.

Pale corporate imitations of green and ethical brands or products are truly harmful. They distract consumers and divert spending from the real thing and they bring the risk of early onset “issue fatigue”. You know how it goes – yawn, yawn, here’s another company that says it pays its suppliers a decent price because it really cares about them or says it’s really committed to fighting climate change. Or whatever …

Maybe we need a regulator for environmental and ethical claims. We’ve got Ofgem for electricity and Ofwat for water – I propose we should name this one Ethoff.

Let’s come back to Green Britain Day. The campaign itself has laudable aims, fighting climate change and making Britain a greener place. Who could argue with that? But look for any substance and you won’t find it. It’s all recycled and gimmicky.

And it’s a distraction. Green Britain is a serious goal, it requires a vision underpinned by real policies, a suite of joined up actions that we can all get behind – with meaningful outcomes. It’s a mission not a PR opportunity.

• Dale Vince is the founder and owner of Ecotricity

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Gaddafi demands Lockerbie bomber’s return

Prime minister tells Libyan leader at G8 summit that Megrahi case is matter for the Scottish courts

In his first face to face meeting with Gordon Brown, Muammar Gaddafi today demanded the return of the convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi.

The Libyan leader was told by the prime minister that it was a matter for the Scottish courts.

Gaddafi, wearing a flowing black and white silken robe and protected by female bodyguards, is at the G8 summit in Italy as the rotating president of the African Union.

He has pitched a bedouin-style tent outside the G8 barracks in which world leaders are staying during the three-day summit.

In a 40-minute meeting between the two leaders, conducted in Arabic and English, Brown insisted he could not intervene in the Megrahi case.

Scottish judges this week delayed completing an appeal into Megrahi’s conviction until at least September, even though he has prostate cancer and faces a risk of dying in prison.

The bombing of flight Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie in 1988 killed 270 people on the aircraft and the ground.

Gaddafi’s demand for the return of Megrahi was countered by Brown urging him to do more to cooperate with the Metropolitan police investigation into the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher in 1984.

Her murder led to the severing of diplomatic ties between the two countries for a decade, but Gaddafi subsequently worked to improve relations with the west, so much so that Tony Blair went to Tripoli to meet him in 2004.

The Libyans have admitted responsibility for Fletcher’s killing by embassy staff and have paid compensation, but Britain is complaining that Libya is not producing witnesses, meaning the inquiry has stalled for more than a year.

Brown also called on Gaddafi to help bring about the return of six-year-old Nadia Fawzi, who was abducted by her Libyan father in 2007.

Her English mother, Sarah Taylor, wants her daughter returned, and Gaddafi promised Brown that the Libyan courts were on course to reunite the two shortly.

More broadly, Brown – who was accompanied by three UK officials – also urged Gaddafi to use his influence to persuade Middle Eastern countries to renounce nuclear weapons.

It is not clear whether Gaddafi has any influence over the Iranian regime.

The 67-year-old leader, wearing dark glasses for much of the day and sporting long dark hair, resembled an ageing rock legend and was generally seen as the star of today’s meetings.

Brown praised him for abandoning his chemical weapons programme unilaterally in 2003, a move intended to bring about a normalisation of relations with the west.

The two leaders also agreed to work together to bring stability to the oil market, with Brown promising to use his influence to improve African representation on the boards of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

British officials admitted the meeting had started formally, but gradually warmed up as discussions continued.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Where to go wilder in Britain

Scotland and Dartmoor are the only places to legally wild camp in Britain. But there are a few sites that offer a more rugged camping experience. Dixe Wills picks the best.

Find more unusual campsites in tomorrow’s Guardian Travel

Ah, the call of the wild. Unzipping your tent in the morning to discover you weren’t dreaming – you really are camped beside some tranquil mountainside tarn, or in a clearing in a mighty forest, or on a cliff top high above a sparkling sea. With a proper hot summer still on the cards, what could gladden the heart more than getting out into the British countryside with a tent and soaking it all up?

Except, of course, it’s not as simple as that. The enlightened Scots, who have long enjoyed a relaxed attitude to land access, have made wild camping legal more or less anywhere (with a few sensible caveats) since 2003. In the rest of Britain, however, the practice is only officially sanctioned in one area – a section of Dartmoor.

The good news is that there’s now a growing number of campsites south of the border that have begun to offer campers the chance to savour the joys of off-piste camping. Where these sites differ from the norm is that rather than providing beautifully tended croquet-flat lawns, electric hook-ups and hardstanding, they offer chunks of topography just as nature crafted it, open fires on which to incinerate your marshmallows and, typically, a compost loo for those campers who feel no compunction to imitate what bears do in the woods. It may not be wild camping in its purest form but it’s a darn good imitation.

Wales leads the way in wilder campsites, with southern England hot on their heels. The phenomenon, it seems, is yet to catch on in the north of England.

Here’s a selection of the best sites where you can go wild in the country.

Gwalia Farm, Cemaes, Machynlleth, Powys

A large area around a lake is given over to camping at Gwalia, an organic farm that enjoys some quite breathtaking views of Snowdonia. Closer at hand, there are wild orchids, buzzards, kites, nightjars, glow worms, and all manner of aquatic life to look out for, including an otter. Drinking and washing water comes from a natural spring, there are earth loos in the woods and, should you wish to wander, the farm is on the Cambrian Way, Glyndwr’s Way and the Dyfi Valley Way.

• Gwalia Farm. Adult £4, child £2; +44 (0)1650 511377.

Graig Wen Arthog, nr Dolgellau, Gwynedd

Graig Wen admits to playing host to a conventional campsite but, for four weeks a year, visitors are also given the choice of going further afield and pitching in secret meadows, sheltered glades or a high bluff with views out over the Mawddach estuary. Streams and dry stone walls forge their way over the fields and through the woods, while the facilities are suitably wild – extending only to something described as “a tree bog compost toilet”. Best not to ask, I think.

• Graig Wen. From 25 July to 21 August; adult £7 (£10 on Fri/Sat); child £3 (£5); discount offered for backpackers/cyclists; +44 (0)1341 250482.

Gwern Gof Uchaf, Capel Curig, Gwynedd

One for high altitude campers, Gwern Gof Uchaf is an exposed site directly beneath Snowdonia’s famous Tryfan peak and is part of a working hill farm stretching for 750 acres above the Ogwen valley. The Carneddau and Glyders summits can also be tackled from this base camp which is open all year, so you can even introduce your tent to some snow (it’s wonderfully insulating, you know). Comfort comes in the form of hot showers, close by.

• Gwern Gof Uchaf. Adult £4, child £3; +44 (0)1690 720294.

Glyn Y Mul Farm, Aberdulais, West Glamorgan

The river Dulais runs through Glyn Y Mul’s 18-acre wood, making it a memorable location for a bit of communing with nature. The owners particularly welcome grub-eating survivalists to their Lone Wolf Campsite but are also happy to accommodate visitors who merely want to get away from it all. Best of all, should everything go pear-shaped with your attempt to create a shelter from mud filtered through the shells of beech nuts, you can crawl out of the woods for a hot power shower.

• Glyn Y Mul Farm. Adult £5, child £2.50; +44 (0)1639 643204

Camping Wild Wales, Trefin, Pembrokeshire

This is a site whose owners’ mission statement importunes visitors to slough off their urban selves, “strip away those outer layers and feel the breeze of freedom”, so chilling out and relaxing are pretty much compulsory. Lodged halfway between St David’s and Fishguard, just off the Pembrokeshire Coast Path, there’s plenty of room to spread out your shelter of choice or you can take refuge in one of their tipis.

• Camping Wild Wales. Adult £7, child (4-14) £3; +44 (0)1348 837892.

Hole Station Campsite, Highampton, Devon

There are 45 acres of meadow and woodlands at Hole Station but only twelve pitches, making it a little piece of heaven for those who agree with Sartre’s maxim that hell is other people. Approached down a long private lane in a sumptuous, yet quiet, corner of Devon, it’s little wonder that Hole railway station, from which the site takes its name, has long since given up the ghost. You can also rent a tent – very useful if you’re travelling light on the Devon coast-to-coast route, for which Hole marks the halfway point.

• Hole Station Campsite. £12 per pitch (inc. 2 people), extra adults £4, U16s £3, dogs £1. Camp fire kit £5; +44 (0)1409 231266

Yellow Wood Bush Camp, nr Hay-on-Wye, Herefordshire

The folk at Yellow Wood are very much in touch with their inner Ray Mears and offer all manner of courses on bushcraft and wilderness survival on their clutch of forested sites in the shadow of the Black Mountains. However, if you just want to bring along your tent, or string up a tarp or a hammock and do your own thing, that’s cool too. For that added wild touch, the precise location of their sites is not revealed until you’ve booked yourself in.

• Yellow Wood Bush Camp. Adult £5, child £3; +44 (0)7800 767519.

Ashwood Farm, East Grinstead, West Sussex

Proving that being within commuting distance of the capital is still no barrier to camping in the wilds, this farm near the Sussex/Surrey border provides a haven of sylvan tranquillity. It’s also a paradise for children who are free to race up and down the hill, build their own woodland wigwams, dens, shelters or fairy houses according to taste, or just idle away the hours on a tree swing. There’s also a big discount if you can arrive by public transport or under your own steam.

• Ashwood Farm. With car: adult £12; child £6. Without car: £8/£4. Fire kit £5. +44 (0)1342 316129

Dernwood Farm, Waldron, East Sussex

A small family-run farm, Dernwood has an 8-acre field in the woods in which you can pick your spot and another 60-odd acres of ancient forest to explore once you’ve set up camp. The only concessions to home comforts are a water tap and a recently installed loo in a nearby shed. For those who insist on being kept in touch with the outside world, newspapers can be delivered to the farmhouse, a ten-minute walk away. A fleet of wheelbarrows is also on hand for ferrying your gear through the woods.

• Dernwood Farm. Adult £6.50, child (5-15) £4.50, family (2 adults 2 children) £17.50; +44 (0)1435 812726.

And a final one for anyone who wants to try out a wild campsite in Scotland before heading off into the countryside beyond:

Duloch Hamlet, Inverkeithing, Fife

Offering what they euphemistically describe as “limited rustic facilities” (a sawdust toilet and a stand pipe), Duloch Hamlet is a mixture of clearings in woodland and meadows. There are fifteen acres of woods to get happily lost in and hides for watching badgers and deer. There’s also a herb garden if you fancy adding that final flourish to your al fresco feast, and a few pre-erected tents available if you prefer to travel ultra-lite.

• Duloch Hamlet. £6 per person; log kits £3; +44 (0)1383 417681.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


‘Angel of the north syndrome’

It’s a big day tomorrow. Maybe not so big outside Britain, but for those of us here, of a certain age, it’s a big one. The Jaguar XJ is getting a re-do and is being officially shown to grunt journalists (after a rollout to Jay Leno, some celebs and a few biggie journos this evening, as I write). But this one is going to be a shock for a few. It’s already attracted some flak from some people who can’t quite cope with the idea that the XJ, yes, the Xf’ingJ, Jag’s flagship saloon, has actually cut loose from the design lineage that goes back to XJ6 in 1968 (and arguably, even further). This is a proper re-do. Clean sheet of paper. It’s not trad Jag.


Pictures have been leaked all over the web today. It’s a brave look. I think it might work, but a guy who has seen even more big launches than me has some wise words (see below link to Autocar, where there are also pics of the car). Is that C-pillar and use of crome quite right? Not sure. Might be inspired, might look odd. But as Mr Cropley says, let’s wait and see it in the flesh, in the street.


It took a while for many people to except Gormley’s ’Angel of the North’, a massive sculpture off the A1 in the north of England. But accept it they did.


With my business head on, I wonder what sales prospects for the XJ look like? Tough market segment and a tough time. Will it turn heads? In a good way? I think – and sincerely hope – it will. Looking foward to seeing it tomorrow morning at the Saatchi Gallery.

Steve Cropley in Autocar

Mobile broadband holes logged

Woman using laptop on Primrose Hill

There are still significant notspots when it comes to 3G mobile coverage in the UK, regulator Ofcom has revealed.

It has pledged to investigate why some places, particularly in rural areas, are still failing to get any coverage.

It also said it will investigate mobile broadband speeds, which vary tremendously in different areas and at different times of day.

Between February 2008 and February 2009 there were two million new connections to mobile broadband, said Ofcom.

3G (or Third Generation) services allow people to connect to the web via a wireless network, either using a phone, a dongle or datacard which can be plugged into a PC or a laptop.

In the UK such services are offered by operators such as Vodafone, Orange, O2, T-Mobile and 3.

But there are questions about how reliable these services are and whether they can provide the speeds needed by consumers.

More spectrum

Research from broadband communications firm Epitiro recently found that the average download speed achieved with mobile broadband was just under 1Mbps (megabit per second).

"if mobile networks are going to become one of the key routes to the internet for million of users, they’re going to need to build more six-lane highways to replace those B-roads where the traffic keeps getting stuck."

Rory Cellan-Jones
BBC technology correspondent

Read the dot.life blog in full

At 0300 this average rose to 1.8Mbps, illustrating that contention issues – how many people use the service at any given time – plays a big role in limiting speed.

On average mobile broadband users were only getting a quarter of advertised speeds, found Epitiro’s study.

Increasingly consumers are dropping their fixed line phones in favour of mobile. While mobile calls increased by 11 billion minutes during 2008, the number of minutes on fixed lines fell by 8 billion.

Consumers are getting increasingly data-hungry. In 2003, just 1% of revenue per mobile connection came from data but by 2008 that rose to 6%, according to Ofcom.

The Digital Britain report pledged to free up more 3G spectrum, which should improve coverage.

Consumer Focus, an organisation dedicated to campaigning for a fair deal for consumers, welcomed Ofcom’s review of the mobile market.

"Some consumers find themselves excluded from mobile communications due to gaps in 3G coverage or the market’s failure to make new technology accessible to all," said Audrey Gallacher, telecoms expert at Consumer Focus.

She felt that Ofcom could do more to make it easier for consumers to sign up to mobile broadband.

"Accessing the best deal in a market where mobile operators offer a bewildering array of over 200,000 different tariffs is a real challenge," she said.

"With mobiles now treated as an essential service rather than a luxury, there is more pressure than ever before on mobile companies to give consumers a fair deal and make mobile services accessible to all," she added.

UK 3G coverage graphic


This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

What role for TV in wired world?

Children watching TV

Will we need public service broadcasting in the wired world Bill Thompson has his doubts.

"Much of the debate that followed last week’s publication of the Digital Britain report has focused on the proposal to take some of the income from the TV licence and make it available to fund universal broadband access, with a suggestion that once this has been accomplished £130m a year could be used to support local news services and perhaps even children’s programming provided by people other than the BBC.

Within the BBC there is a strong feeling that this would be a very bad idea because the corporation’s resilience comes in part from having a guaranteed source of funding that does not rely on politically-motivated decisions of the government of the day.

The fear is that once the licence fee is shared there will be nothing to stop it being carved up to meet short-term policy objectives.

Others share this view. The Guardian’s Polly Toynbee is vehemently opposed to what she calls ‘deliberately breaching the unique status of the BBC’ and asks if the destruction of the BBC is ‘really going to be this Labour government’s legacy’

The final decision on the TV license is yet to be made, but the argument about funding the BBC is only one aspect of a much larger debate about public service broadcasting in the UK and how we pay for television content that is designed to meet specific social and cultural objectives, such as news, education and children’s programming.

ITV, Channel 4 and Five all have obligations to provide public service content, and it is hard to see how these commercial broadcasters can meet them as television advertising revenue falls and competition from digital channels and online sources continues to increase.

The scale of the problem is enormous, and was highlighted in a recent report from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) commissioned by the entertainment union BECTU and the National Union of Journalists, both of whom have many members working in broadcasting.

Genuine crisis

‘Mind the Funding Gap’ looks at the impact of the switch to digital broadcasting on the main UK channels and estimates that it will leave the commercial public service broadcasters with a funding gap of between £145 and £235 million, although the calculations are based on many assumptions about how much the analogue television spectrum is worth compared to the lower value of a digitally-broadcast channel and are rather more indicative than accurate.

Even if the numbers are uncertain, there is clearly a massive loss of subsidy that, along with the current reduction in advertising income, has created a genuine crisis in public service broadcasting.

What, then, should be done about it

Earlier this week I attended a meeting organised by the FEU, the Federation of Entertainment Unions, to discuss ‘New Forms of Funding for Public Service Broadcasting’, and heard from John Smith of the Musicians’ Union, Luke Crawley from the media and entertainment union BECTU and the London Business School’s Professor Paddy Barwise.

The debate covered a range of topics but focused on a proposal in ‘Mind the Funding Gap’ to pay for public service programmes by imposing a one per cent on the turnover of pay television and mobile phone companies, raising around £280m a year.

The argument is a simple one. If a levy on telephone use, as proposed in the Digital Britain report, can be used to pay for next generation broadband, taxing old services to pay for new, why not have a levy on pay television services and mobile phone companies to ensure that providers of public service broadcasting have the same level of public funding in a digital world as they do in the analogue one

This is such a broken idea that it is difficult to know where to begin to unwind it.

Old-style content

"The age of television is ending, just as the age of printed textbooks and user manuals is ending, as the age of the hand loom and the wheelwright and the scribe ended before them"

Bill Thompson

Bill ThompsonPerhaps the most dangerous assumption is that an always-on digital world will be so similar to the old analogue one that the passive consumption of scheduled television programming will be the only way most people will want to spend their time and so vast amounts of public money must be spent to ensure that it continues to be available.

Instead of investing in innovation and taking advantage of the capabilities that high speed networks offer, finding ways to deliver entertainment and news and education to people wherever they are, with interactivity and options for engagement built in, the old style content providers want to tax network services so they can continue to provide old style content.

They want to keep us all in a world where vast numbers of people spend most of their precious leisure time watching a flat-screen television on which the limits of interactivity are set by an electronic programming guide and, if you’re very lucky, a red button that lets you vote on your most-disliked Big Brother housemate.

Of course the unions want to protect the jobs of their members, and they cannot be criticised for this, but sometimes bad things happen to good people. Many fine writers, including my partner, are suffering because book publishing is going through enormous turmoil, but there is no subsidy on offer to them.

In broadcasting actors are out of work while directors and production crews see budgets cut and funding dry up, and journalists are living with uncertainty.

This is happening because the age of television is ending, just as the age of printed textbooks and user manuals is ending, as the age of the hand loom and the wheelwright and the scribe ended before them. It is a hard change to live through, and those who are only skilled to work in the world of television will inevitably fear it, just as print-only journalists fear the online future.

But this is not a reason to distort the growth of online services in order to give television a few more years.

It is an argument for reskilling, for offering funding to innovative services, for building on the ideas of projects like Martin Bright’s ‘New Deal of the Mind’ that are trying to find ways to support and sustain those whose career prospects have been affected by the growth of the internet.

When I was young there was a great children’s TV show called ‘Why Don’t You Just Switch Off Your Television Set and Go and Do Something Less Boring Instead’, which encouraged viewers to be active and not simply passive viewers of packaged content.

I think it’s time that those involved in television production were asked: Why Don’t You Stop Banging on About Public Service Broadcasting and Go and Make Something Less Boring Instead

"

Bill Thompson is an independent journalist and regular commentator on the BBC World Service programme Digital Planet.</p


This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

Costly electricity

Prospects for plug-in electrics and hybrids continue to provoke much discussion in the industry. Last week, we heard that Daimler’s electric Smart has been formally given the go-ahead to enter commercial production next year. The Smart Fortwo (sorry Daimler, but I have to capitalise brand and model names) is a curious one. It’s perhaps an example of a car that was ahead of its time. In the looks department, it is much more acceptable now than it was back in the late 1990s. And a plug-in electric version seems to make good sense.


But the batteries are not going to be cheap. And that’s a problem: who pays? Will the customer pay for that? The vehicle manufacturer? Will governments tinker with regulatory frameworks to encourage take-up? There seems to be a consensus in the industry that governments will have to play a part in helping electric cars develop significant market penetration. And, the argument goes, the government needs to do that as part of a broader energy policy that addresses overall CO2 generation, renewable power and economic or energy security issues. There’s a lot to consider.


At some point though, the consumer is going to be asked to make a contribution to the additional costs associated with a battery pack and electric drive. Early adopters at initial low volumes may be fine with that. The interesting thing though will be the speed with which plug-in electric vehicles can become cheaper on a cost-per-unit basis as volumes become bigger. It will be something of a chicken and egg situation – which is why the regulatory framework is particularly important in terms of the fossil fuel relativities.


But would you pay almost GBP400 (USD650) a month to lease a Smart with electric drive? That’s some premium to ask the customer to pay. How quickly can that sort of figure come down and to what extent will the government subsidise these vehicles? One point that should not be lost: in Britain the government takes plenty of tax from motorists at the petrol pump, way more than is required for investment in roads. And Her Majesty’s Government needs every penny it can get, even if politicians like the sound of a greener electric future.

RESEARCH: Market projections for EVs and hybrids

June 22, 1675: Greenwich Becomes Royal Pane on the Stars

1675: Britain’s King Charles II issues a royal warrant establishing an observatory at Greenwich. The Royal Observatory, then on the eastern outskirts of London, will enjoy a long and storied history and become a Prime piece of real estate.
Charles had a navy and a large merchant fleet. They needed better ways of navigating. Latitude [...]

Engaging with the net

The Digital Britain report offers a lot to work with, says Bill Thompson.

"We live in a largely digitised country, so in one sense the Digital Britain report is an exercise in ensuring that the legal and regulatory system catches up with the lived reality for most of the UK population rather than a visionary document describing a far-distant future.

As such it is a serious attempt to ensure that government makes the best possible use of the network in serving us all, and that businesses offering access to the internet or providing services and content over the network are regulated, rewarded and cajoled as necessary to ensure that the UK does not fall even further behind the rest of the industrialised world.

READ THE DIGITAL BRITAIN REPORT

Digital Britain report(3MB)
Most computers will open PDF documents automatically, but you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader.

I criticised the interim report when it was published in January because it had been written behind closed doors and offered few opportunities for consultation and engagement for those outside the charmed circle of invited experts.

But it is clear that Stephen Carter and his team have listened to and taken notice of the extensive debate around their initial proposals. The result, though far from perfect, offers a good basis for work on the detail of implementation and legislation, and there are clear signs that those who want to engage will be able to do so.

There are suggestions on how to liberalise and improve access to wireless infrastructure, with potentially transformative proposals to shake up spectrum allocation to build a next generation mobile network offering 50Mpbs in cities and 5Mpbs in rural areas.

There is a confirmed commitment to delivering a universal 2Mbps (megabits per second) fixed-line broadband service to the whole country by 2012, and a six pound a year levy on existing copper telephone lines to pay for the ‘final third’ next generation coverage if the market cannot deliver. Two megabits per second is too slow for me, but universal service offers so many opportunities for engagement that it’s definitely worth having.

And there may even be ‘cultural tax relief’ for games developers and distributors, on the lines of the model that has made Canada such an attractive place for UK developers to move to.

The report comes on a day when the importance of the internet and the services it supports has been drawn to the attention of the whole world.

"Unfortunately the proposals to limit file-sharing are less well considered and seem to be hopelessly optimistic, or perhaps to betray a naivety about how the internet works. "

Bill Thompson

Bill ThompsonThe protests over the election results in Iran have depended on Facebook, YouTube and of course Twitter to get their message to the world, put pressure on their own government and organise their activities.

Just last week the French Constitutional Council of France halted the government’s plans to give a new authority the ability to cut the network access of internet users accused of copyright violations because "the internet is a component of the freedom of expression".

In the UK the Prime Minister Gordon Brown wrote in the The Times today that "a fast internet connection is now seen by most of the public as an essential service, as indispensable as electricity, gas and water."

Locking content

The view of the network as a utility and as a tool for expression is a very different one from that put forward by the dominant players in the so-called ‘content industry’.

Record companies, film studios, newspapers and the TV broadcasters have all lobbied hard for the UK government to shape its internet policy around their interests.

They want copyright laws to be strengthened so they can lock up any and all content. They want anyone who dares to challenge their business to be kicked offline, fined and locked up. They want a world in which they control what can happen.

Fortunately that pressure seems largely to have been resisted, and the real thrust of the proposals is about getting everyone online and ensuring that the network is there to be used in ways that support creative expression, new forms of industry and new models of engagement.

Funding news

The Digital Britain of the report is one in which all have access, not one where we try to preserve old industrial models.

When it comes to newspapers the report notes that ‘Digital Britain is at the beginning of a new and possibly disruptive wave of local news, generated by communities for communities using free online media’. It recognises that ‘government and business will need collaboratively to devise new ways of funding the news’ without simply promising subsidies to the existing players who have failed to adapt to the network reality and have sought protection and subsidy.

The debate about the future of public service broadcasting includes many progressive ideas, and both the decision to make Channel 4 more than just a broadcaster but turn it into ‘the open new media authority providing the seed-corn for creative innovation in the multi-media world’, and the message to the BBC that the license fee does not belong to it are all good ones.

Unfortunately the proposals to limit file-sharing are less well considered and seem to be hopelessly optimistic, or perhaps to betray a naivety about how the internet works.
Ofcom is to be asked to oversee efforts by UK ISPs to reduce what they term ‘illegal file-sharing’ by 70%, initially through notifying those accused of downloading material or revealing their names and addresses to rights holders so that they can be prosecuted.

If this doesn’t work then Ofcom may then be granted power to oblige ISPs to limit bandwidth or block specific protocols, presumably in the hope that doing this will deter or stop downloads. But this proposal ignores the fact that work is already going on to develop new file sharing technologies that are encrypted or disguise addresses more effectively. Ofcom might well hit its 70% target just because everyone moves away from BitTorrent without actually reducing the number of files shared over the net.

However the fact that the BPI boss Geoff Taylor found it necessary to accuse the government of ‘digital dithering’ for refusing to allow rights holders to have internet users cut off – the same proposals that have just been thrown out in France – is a good sign indeed.

In the end public service broadcasting and the protection of the content industries matter far less than the promotion of universal access and the creation of tools and services that encourage everyone online to demonstrate their own creative potential.

Networked world

Children watching TV

A digital Britain is not one in which we are all sitting glued to our screens watching the same sort of television programming that we could have had on a cathode-ray set in the 1970′s, downloading blockbuster movies or listening to more dull music made by rich popstars whose only real interest is their property portfolio.

It is one in which universal access allows us all to be fully-fledged citizens of a networked world that offers opportunities for creative expression and communication instead of the passive consumption of packaged content. There’s a glimpse of that world through the Digital Britain report, and it is one that those of us who already live a networked life need to clarify, share and work to build.

"

Bill Thompson is an independent journalist and regular commentator on the BBC World Service programme Digital Planet.</p


This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

Associated Press Hands Local And National News Sites An Opportunity To Get Links And Traffic

The Associated Press is facing a blog firestorm after issuing take down notices to Drudge Retort for linking to and reproducing snippets of AP stories. AP is now attempting to define how their stories can be linked to and excerpted — and the response from the blogosphere appears to be to boycott the AP, i.e. [...]

The Tiger Could Lose Its Roar

M’sia needs to work harder and faster if it does not want to be left
behind: Analyst

William Pesek

Those wondering where Malaysia is headed should keep an eye on Mr Tony
Fernandes.

Perhaps no one personifies the promise of Asia’s 10th-biggest economy
better than the 43-year-old entrepreneur. In 2001, he created a budget
airline, beating the odds in an industry dominated by government-linked
companies. AirAsia has been turning heads ever since.

Airline magnate Aristotle Onassis once said the key to succeeding in
business is knowing something others don’t. Mr Fernandes knew that not
only were Asians ready for no-frills carriers, but so were investors.

Mr Fernandes is often called South-east Asia’s answer to Mr Richard
Branson. It seems highly appropriate, then, that the two men teamed to
launch AirAsia X, a long-haul budget carrier that made its maiden flight
this month. Mr Branson’s Virgin Group is among its key backers.

For all his success, Mr Fernandes is a microcosm of why Malaysia’s economy
isn’t on the upward trajectory it could be.

Politicians’ efforts over the years to protect the turf of Malaysia
Airlines (MAS) backfired, leaving Kuala Lumpur lagging behind in the race
for Asia’s travel hub. Malaysia has tied one hand behind its back to help
national champions at the expense of the bigger picture.

“I’m asking this for national interest, not MAS’ interest or that of
anything else,” said Mr Fernandes of his battle to fly from Kuala Lumpur
to Singapore. “The consumers have suffered enough.”

Politicians continue to dither over another national champion:
State-controlled carmaker Proton Holdings. While talks on an alliance with
Volkswagen AG are progressing, the saga is a reminder that Malaysia’s
leaders are wasting time the nation doesn’t have.

In Proton’s case, the exercise is about finding a partner to help revive
sales and return the 24-year-old company to profit. Yet this, like Mr
Fernandes’ fight to expand his innovative airline, is emblematic of how
politicians often don’t grasp that Malaysia’s place in Asia is rather
tenuous.

Malaysia is a remarkable place with incredible potential. Its economy has
achieved great things in the 50 years since independence from Britain.
Once a tropical backwater, Kuala Lumpur is now a modern, skyscraper-filled
city home to the world’s second-tallest buildings, the twin Petronas
Towers.

Yet, the next 50 years will arguably be harder than the last. It wasn’t
one of the original Asian tigers, but Malaysia became one over the years.

However, “the world is moving ahead at a rapid pace and it won’t wait for
Malaysia”, said Mr Razlan Mohamed, chief executive of Malaysian Rating
Corp. The nation “needs to work harder and work faster”.

Ms Chrisanne Chin from MIMS Business School, Malaysian Institute of
Management and INTI University College, puts it this way: “It’s not so
much what Malaysia is lacking, but that China, India, Vietnam and even
Thailand and Indonesia have improved so much they are capable of
leapfrogging Malaysia in another five years because of specific
comparative advantages, from low costs to human capital to technology.”

Human capital is a particular concern. The government needs to do more to
train the leaders of tomorrow and import the talent that companies need to
thrive. It also has to win more of the foreign direct investment flowing
elsewhere in Asia.

There is much backslapping about how the US$147-billion ($213-billion)
economy may expand 6 per cent this year and 6.5 per cent next year. The
real picture can be found in the World Economic Forum’s latest
competitiveness survey, in which Malaysia slipped two spots to 21st place.

A huge obstacle for Malaysia is something that can barely be discussed: A
37-year-old affirmative-action programme favouring the predominant Malay
community.

It alienates non-Malays, limits foreign investment, stifles competition
and keeps the economy from moving toward a meritocracy. Yet, it is a
third-rail issue. Most Malaysians won’t even discuss it without first
looking around to see who is listening.

A sense of political drift doesn’t help. Four years in office, Prime
Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has spent more time trying to solidify the
influence of his political party – the United Malays National
Organisation – than bringing Malaysia’s economy to the next level.

For a glimpse of the future, one could do worse than ask Mr Ramon
Navaratnam, president of anti-corruption group Transparency International
Malaysia and author of the book, Where to, Malaysia?, who has this to say:
“The future is bright, but only if we are honest with ourselves that we
have a lot of difficult work to do … Otherwise, we will see the rest of
Asia pulling ahead and Malaysia walking in place.”

William Pesek is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are
his own.