University is sadly coming to an end, and friends depart, just a little tribute to Matthew Brett

(www.The-Word.blogspot.com)

Who as you can see made life entertaining!

Well the date is 666, and the Atlantic is seperating us!

(I know this sounds rich after posting that, but don't be a stranger)

¶ 12:09 AM 0 comments links to this post

Is Hain easing way for more valley drownings?

England thirstsafter yet morefree Welsh water

The other day, more regions in south east England were added to the region's growing "drought order" list.

Then the National Farmers Union demanded that a "national grid" for water be set up, admitting that what this really meant was to transfer water from Wales to south east England.

Then it was revealed that in the Wales Bill, currently going through Parliament, Welsh Secretary Peter Hain has written in a clause making sure that the Welsh Assembly will not have control over Wales's water resources. Control will stay in London.

These events are clearly linked.

About five years ago, the newspaper Wales on Sunday discovered that several English water companies were drawing up contingency plans to flood Welsh valleys to supply the English regions as England's water problems increase.

The basic plan is to syphon off water from the River Wye and pipe it over to the River Thames. In order to keep the Wye topped up, valleys in South East Wales would have to be drowned.

Welsh Water was quoted as saying they knew the plan had been discussed and that they were opposed to it.

Such plans are bound to be just as heavily opposed as the drowning of Tryweryn was in the 1960s. And if it had the power, the Welsh Assembly would certainly throw the plans out. Which, of course, is why Mr Hain is making sure that the Assembly doesn't have that power; instead making sure that the votes of English MPs will drown out the votes of Welsh MPs.

How will media respond?

What will Wales's English-controlled media make of it?

Wales on Sunday, part of the Western Mail/South Wales Echo/Liverpool Daily Post conglomerate, said this in its comment column at the time: "We, and the people of Wales, will take a lot of convincing that any of our communities, agricultural land or sites of scientific or scenic importance should be sacrificed for the benefit of English water companies."

Note the careful wording. It's not all-out opposition. It seems to be suggesting that if England puts up a convincing enough argument media approval could follow. How did the rest of the Welsh media respond?

The Mail clearly didn't regard the story as very important, relegating it to page 6, and then only in terms of a denial from Thames Water. Further down its report, though, Welsh Water repeated its claim that it knew the prospect had been discussed
by English water companies (why would WW lie?).

Water firms plea to Blair

The South Wales Echo and the South Wales Argus, both of whom circulate in the potentially-threatened Monmouthshire and Blaenau Gwent valleys, did not see the story worthy of even a mention. There was no more than a perfunctory mention on the TV newscasts.

Then there was silence until,

months later, England's water shortages hit the headlines with a report accusing the ater companies of abstracting too much water from rivers, causing them to run dry. The water chiefs responded by saying they were urging the Blair government to allow the building of more reservoirs (guess where?).

The government has never promised to turn the water companies down.

Are the English water companies still maintaining they have never discussed plans to transfer water from Wales?

Tryweryn all over again?

In the 1960s, Tryweryn Valley in North Wales, including the village of Capel Celyn, was drowned to supply Liverpool. The plan was massively opposed in Wales and led to a huge surge of support for the Welsh Nationalists. It underlined how powerless Wales is when its wishes conflict with those of its big powerful neighbour. Although almost every MP in Wales voted against the plan when it came before the House of Commons, it was approved because their votes were swamped by English MPs.

Earlier this year, in an effort to attract the National Eisteddfod in order to bolster its Year of Culture credentials, Liverpool pathetically apologised for drowning Tryweryn (but refused cash support for a memorial). Shortly afterwards, a BBC documentary about the drowning claimed that Liverpool never needed to drown the valley and today does not use much, if any, water from the reservoir.

¶ 10:11 PM 0 comments links to this post

Pictures from the BBC

Top Left: Things got fruity on two streets in Swansea, when a film crew arrived to produce an advert for a soft drinks firm.

Top Right: An actress in Hazel Street was buried in apples and lemons. Whatever a part calls for!

Middle Left: Actors were involved in throwing fruit in the air and rolling it down Cambridge Street.

Middle Right: One resident Jean Harries volunteered to have her window smashed by a watermelon. To be replaced afterwards of course.

I've done some digging, and it does appear that complaints about tango are founded, but I remain unconvinced, links to news stories below:

Brecon Beacon Hearald

Swansea Evening Post

Swansea Press Association

Nevertheless, the petition from the Swansea North Residents Association can be found here, If your interested.

¶ 1:55 PM 0 comments links to this post

On the 17th of February 2006 it rained fruit in Swansea North, causing much damage to property (for which we have received no compensation). Here's the reason why:

http://www.swansea-res.org.uk/tv_advert.html

The filming of this TV advert traumatized many small, domestic animals and a number of our older residents are now too afraid to leave their homes.With enough complaints, hopefully those responsible will think twice before soiling the streets of Britain with fruit pulp again. Please send this video evidence to your friends. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE FROM SWANSEA NORTH TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

Yours sincerely,

Steve Griffiths (on behalf of the Swansea North Residents Association committee)

Returning from church hall last Friday (17th) we witnessed the aftermath of a destructive TV commercial film crew. The damage (smashed windows, bent car aerials and broken garden ornaments) was caused when several tonnes of fruit was dumped.

JUST TO SEE HOW FUNNY IT WOULD LOOK BOUNCING DOWN THE STREETS OF SWANSEA NORTH!

The “Tango” drinks brand did nothing to clear up the slippery mush they left behind (which contravened several health and safety laws). And would only respond to Association Secretary Steve with a statement: “Sometimes you have to make a mess to dramatise fruit refreshment to the consumer”. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!

¶ 12:44 PM 0 comments links to this post

Students plot revenge Victims of the escalating war between lecturers and universities, undergraduates are beginning to fight back. Their weapon? Legal action. Riazat Butt reports

Oxford Road in Manchester - a magnet for students, tourists and untamed schoolchildren - has long been home to gaggles of bored youngsters distributing coupons for £1 pasties, recruiting for the latest political cause or seducing revellers to come to nearby clubs with the promise of cheap booze. But a new strand of solicitation has been added to this chaotic pedestrian landscape: how to sue your university.

Students, and even people who just look like students (including a reporter from the Guardian's Manchester office), have had flyers thrust into their hands, exhorting them to reclaim their rights and seek compensation for the difficulties suffered as a result of industrial action taken by lecturers in their increasingly bitter pay dispute with universities.

The flyers have tapped into the litigious sentiment brewing on campus. Thousands of final-year students across the country have had their work disrupted, with exams cancelled or coursework left unmarked. Many are facing the very real possibility of a lower class of degree than they had hoped for, or even no degree at all.

Lucy Macfarlane's voice curls with embarrassment when she describes a recent job interview. The 21-year-old fashion and marketing student at Leeds University applied for a job as a fashion buyer and, during the interview, was asked what class of degree she was expecting. "I had to tell them I had no idea," she says. "I must have seemed really foolish, but honestly, I've no inkling and it's frustrating. I've not received any marks since I sat exams at Christmas, and it's now the end of May.

"My final mark could be based on a combination of marks from my first semester,
which is pretty good because I was heading for a first or a really high 2:1, and my second year, which wasn't my best year because I didn't work as hard as I should have. I need at least a 2:1 to get a job in the fashion industry and I'm worried about missing out. If I've been awarded a lower class of degree because of this boycott, then I will sue my university."

Her friend Lynsey Morris, 22, has secured a graduate position with a PR consultancy, despite the uncertainty hanging over her degree. But Morris, who is taking English and media studies at the University of Stirling, still describes herself as an "angry graduate". "Thankfully, I have managed to find a great job before my
official graduation date on June 27," she says. "However, this doesn't make up for my feelings of anger towards my university, who are 'unsure' if they will be marking my degree coursework or not. It's not good enough.

"I expect to get a 2:1 but if I don't I will appeal, and if that doesn't work I'll sue the
university for breach of contract or neglect."

Macfarlane adds: "My parents have contacted our local MP and they're writing to the chancellor to have my tuition fees reimbursed. We should sue if we don't get our rightful degrees. They have put up fees so much and what are we getting from it? It's unfortunate - everyone deserves better pay, but students are being used as bait."

Universities, mindful of the mutinous climate, are consulting their legal teams about possible lawsuits. Professor Paul Curran, vice-chancellor at Bournemouth University, says legal action could cost his institution millions of pounds and warns that lecturers would be held jointly liable if students were to sue.

"It won't happen until students are not graduated, so at the moment it's just this risk," Curran says. "It's unclear how far it will go, but it is a potential risk because many universities have regulations that protect them against claims by students, and yet, when you look at the rules and regulations, they don't provide much protection at all. We are exposed to claims and consumer law as anyone else would be."

Lecturers, he adds, run the risk of being sued as joint defendants. "If the students made a claim against us, then one of the options we have is to join in the member of staff who has caused that student not to graduate to the legal action. They would be as liable as we were in the eyes of the claimant."

Potential claims could include loss of employment or earnings, tuition fees, the cost of any reassessment and awards for disappointment, plus any legal costs incurred. "It's a really sad situation all round," says Curran.

An employment law expert confirms that lecturers should not believe their actions are risk-free. Ian Marshall, of Martineau Johnson, says: "Universities will see the lecturers' actions as being in breach of contract. If the university suffers directly as a result of their strike, for example in terms of costly court cases, it may then have cause to take action against the lecturers personally."

There is a limit to the protection a ballot gives to a union and its members, he says. The union cannot be sued for calling a strike and the employees cannot be fairly dismissed for at least 12 weeks for taking part in it. But there is no individual protection from a legal claim for breach of contract. "With students paying increasing fees for their degrees, they are regarded as consumers and are more likely to object if their university doesn't deliver."

But Marshall sounds a note of caution for students reaching for the phone: "This is uncharted territory for all parties. I cannot recall a case where a student has sued a university for not getting the degree they expected or not getting one at all.

"We've been advising universities what to do if they are faced with a lawsuit. So far this hasn't happened. But all it would take is one determined individual - or a law student - to launch an action. For the law student, it would certainly look good on their CV. But most people would rather have a life than a lawsuit, as civil actions are lengthy, expensive procedures."

The National Union of Students says it will support students considering litigation as a result of universities failing to fulfil their obligation to provide a certain standard of service. "This comes as no surprise given the current disruption to their education and, potentially, their future working life," says a spokesman.

Salima Mawji, a partner at specialist London law firm Match, has received several inquiries and has appointments over the next few weeks with students exploring legal avenues. "This area of law is quite complex as it touches on education, employment and trade union legislation," she says. "Students are stuck in the middle. There has to be a very real detriment to a student, say someone missing out on an entry level position at a merchant bank because their degree is unsatisfactory. That's a loss of £20,000-plus straight away."

She rejects the notion that law firms are "ambulance chasing". "We're not shopping around for business nor are we encouraging students to 'get' their universities. Every graduate from 2006 is always going to be tarnished as a consequence of this industrial action.

"When there's a question mark hanging over their degree, you can see the argument."

¶ 4:25 PM 0 comments links to this post