A trip to Cambridge

"It's gonna be so boring," said Mohan, waiting at the bus stop, "all
that time on the coach. I'm just gonna get mangled." He got out his
thermos and took a swig.

An hour and a half later, we alighted at Cambridge. "I didn't think it
would be so short," said Mohan, "I didn't have time to fall asleep."
We walked to the market square and sat down to have lunch. Mohan
managed about a quarter of his and then started complaining that his
thermos was empty.

"Are you sure you don't want to give a talk?" he asked Dörte, "You can
give mine. I'm too mangled." Dörte might have been happy giving a
talk, but not that one. She asked, "Did you really have whiskey in
that thermos?"

"Just milk, you know. Milk." Right. "It was only half full, anyway."
We headed off past Senate House, down Trinity Lane, across the river
and past the library. Behind us, Mohan piped up, "How far is this,
guys? We've been walking for hours. Aren't there any pubs out here?"

After no more than twenty minutes, we reached the modern complex that
is the Centre for Mathematical Sciences. By the end of the day, after
talks with distinctive Irish, Estuary, and Scottish accents, a
surprisingly sober Malaysian gave a decent talk after all, although he
did stop to ask us if he was making any sense.

We enjoyed another couple of days in Cambridge, with more talks,
more than enough food, duck watching, and artistic works visible just
about every time we turned our heads. Then we headed home again,
although the coach was so late that Mohan's thermos was empty before
we got on, despite his trip to fill it up while we were sightseeing.

Ten points for the best suggestion for what this particular work of art might be intended to represent. Another ten available for naming the Cambridge college whose entrance it sits outside.

Royal soap

When I wake up in the morning, I don't expect the first thing I hear on the radio news to be the fact that a 24 year old and his girlfriend have split up. Not even on a quiet Saturday when most of the rest of the news is about a horse race. Not even when the 24 year old is Prince William of Wales. Now, a couple of days later, the "news" is still all over the newspapers.

Of course, the Sydney Morning Herald has not quite followed suit, dressing up its stories as reporting on the media reaction itself. This is normal practice for the SMH, where gossip does not seem to be directly reported, but there are plenty of articles about what the British tabloids or Aussie mags are saying.

Not only does most of the coverage seem to be pure speculation, but I don't understand why we are supposed to be so interested in the story. I would have thought that the daily dose of Neighbours would be enough soap opera for the Brits, but they seem to want more. I've had enough, even without watching Neighbour, although watching the social life of ducks last week was quite intriguing.

Look-alikes

Yesterday, I seemed to keep coming across people who looked like someone else. So many in a short time, that I wondered whether my minds was playing tricks on me.

At cricket training, there was a young guy bowling quite well who looked just like a subcontinental version of a brother of mine. The resemblance was possibly backed up in my mind by the fact that his bowling style was uncannily like my brothers, only better.

Arriving home, I ran into a guy with a very Elvis-like hairdo walking going into the shop below us. I can't say he looked exactly like Elvis, but he appear to be closer in age to what Elvis would be now than many impersonators.

Finally, I had a glimpse of Get a grip on tv, and quickly came to the conclusion that Ben Elton looks like Andrew Denton. Finding those links, I found out that Denton interviewed Elton on Enough Rope last year, and the first few lines of that exchange are enough to reassure me that it's not all in my mind!

Lord of democracy II

I think the issue of reform of the House of Lords, mentioned in yesterday's post, deserves a bit of perspective, historical and otherwise. The House of Lords was originally made up of hereditary peers (the Lords Temporal) and bishops, abbots and priors (the Lords Spiritual). In the 1950s, life peers gained the right to sit in the house, and in 1999, the Blair government began reform of the chamber, reducing it to 92 hereditary peers, 26 Church of England (arch)bishops and the life peers.

This was intended to be only the first stage of the reform, which would ultimately remove the hereditary peers altogether. Whether the new house would be appointed or elected or a combination of the two was yet to be decided. In 2003, the only option supported by the Lords was the all-appointed model, while the Commons rejected all models, with most support for an 80% elected house. A move to a wholly elected chamber is seen by some as giving the second house too much legitimacy, threatening the Commons' supremacy.

Since then, the cash for peerages scandal has raised it's head, and in the most recent Commons vote the fully elected model was the preferred option. Proponents of election suggest that it is clearly more democratic. However, many of the Lords who voted in favour of a fully appointed house, suggest that this would be more representative.

Recent posts by Byron on Democracy in action (again) comment on both the failings of democracy and ideas of representation. I tend to think that the event mentioned (the trial of Jesus) has more in common with the original House of Lords than other forms of democracy, but it does illustrate a broader point and put all the possible reforms in perspective. Whatever system of government we have will be imperfect and will ultimately have to submit to the Lord of all.

Lord of democracy I

In the news today are the Blair government's plans for new casinos, including a "super-casino" in Manchester. The plans, particularly the choice of Manchester rather than Blackpool, have been controversial, and passed through the House of Commons fairly narrowly, considering the size of the Labour majority. Opposition in the House of Lords was even stronger, including those against the super-casino in general as well as critics of the methods used to choose the venue, and the plans were defeated by three votes.

In response to this, several people have suggested that the elected lower house should have its way ahead of the unelected upper house, particularly as the main legislation behind the plan has already passed both houses. As I understand it, if the government chose to continue with the plans, the most the Lords could do is delay them for one year. In Australia, where the upper house (the Senate) is elected, we are more accepting of the idea that the upper house can veto bills. Deadlocks can only be overcome through a full election followed by a joint sitting.

You might wonder whether there is a point to having a chamber whose nature is such that the legitimacy of its votes is so easily questioned. In fact, reforming the House of Lords is another issue that has been in the headlines recently. Proposals for a reformed house were voted on in Parliament earlier this month. The Commons approved two models, one with members directly elected and one with 80% elected, 20% appointed for fixed terms. The all-elected model received the most support. The Lords, however, rejected this, and supported only appointed members of the house.

I find it interesting to consider the equivalents of the House of Lords in the former British Dominions. Not having hereditary peers, the Canadian Senate has always had appointed members and powers comparable to the House of Lords, although there are currently moves toward fixed terms and elected members.

The Australian Senate, more directly based on the US version, was meant to be "the states' house", with an equal number of members for each state. It was also deliberately given quite a bit of legislative power and was one of the earliest directly elected upper houses. Early drafts of the constitution required senators to be chosen by state parliaments, as in the US at the time. I wonder how different Commonwealth-State relations would be now if that model had been kept.

10 points for naming the building in the centre of the photo and finding the (very weak) link between it an this post.

A rubbing stamp

Australia, since the introduction of the GST in 2000, has issued two different categories of postage stamps. International stamps, on which no GST is paid, are distinguished from the normal domestic stamps, whose prise includes GST. Australia Post also has a tradition of celebrating sport and particular sports success in its products, such as this label celebrating the Sydney Swans' Premiership in 2005. In fact, there has been a stamp issued for every Australian gold medal won at a recent summer or winter Olympic Games.

Considering this, it makes some sense that a stamp would be issued to celebrate Australia regaining the Ashes from England last December. It was quite a victory after the shock of the close loss in 2005. However, I have to wonder about the decision to make one of the two stamps an international stamp. Now it is being stuck on letters sent not within Australia, but to England, as well as places where nearly noone has heard of the Ashes. It looks like they're just trying to rub the 5-0 loss in to the English. Then again, why not?

Changing more calendars

Yet another "Happy New Year"! The Iranian New Year, celebrated by many Iranian and Turkic peoples was yesterday. The new year according to the Indian national calendar is tomorrow. Of course, both these calendars are related to the many lunar calendars used in history from the Middle East to India which linked the start of the year to the vernal equinox. The equinox is also a holiday in Japan.

The arrival of the equinox means it should be well and trule spring, but despite two weeks of unseasonably warm weather, we've been hit by an arctic snap and have had snow showers the last two days! We appreciate the long hours of daylight, though.