Preparations for our home in the UK.

I said in my article 'Change of LifeJourney – Epilogue' that our plans for our future direction of life were being collated, costed, and converted into a more conclusive basis.

Our summer visit to the United Kingdom confirmed that it would suit us best to have a home there, as well as in Spain, to give the flexibility in lifestyle we need for the future.

In order to have this base we decided to use one of our rental properties, where we had lived prior to moving out to Spain, as the easiest and least costly option. Unfortunately this meant that we had to give notice to our tenant in the property; but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.

The time is almost upon us to begin the new phase of our life.

The date when the tenant leaves the house has finally been agreed.

Our journey to the UK has been organised. The Channel Tunnel crossing, the route to Calais, and the two hotel stopovers in France have all been arranged.

The refurbishment of our second home has been programmed. The decorators, the kitchen fitters, and the carpet fitters are under starting orders; they're listening for the jangling of the house keys as the starter gun. They know when the race must end!

We have a few days left to make ready our Spanish home for a period of winter hibernation until our anticipated return in the New Year. The closure of 2011 will see our preparation for a new and better 2012 and our ongoing years.

Sparrow's Wash & Brush-up

This little fellow decided to use our window sill for a spot of preening.

Another attempt to move the refuse bins is thwarted!

This morning at approximately 08:30 hrs. the Council refuse lorry arrived on one of its irregular visits to empty the steel garden rubbish container of its goodies.

The bin is situated on a public road close and to the side to our house, as is the household rubbish bin. Unfortunately the bins have to be somewhere near to houses and the current location is the best of a bad situation. They are not situated directly in front of any properties so there is the least amount of intrusion into householders lives under the current system of refuse collection.

Having said this there is an ongoing problem with the owners of the property who's garden boundary wall is next to the location of the bins. They do not believe the bins should be any where near their property. When one looks at how far their house and the entrance to their property is away from the containers to me their attitude is ridiculous!

I have written previously, includingvideos, about the strange behaviour of the lady of the household and her desire to move all rubbish away from near to her boundary wall to in front of our, and neighbours properties. Unfortunately there is a history between us of disagreement over politics.

 

This morning we experience another example of the lady's, what I believe is, irrational and vindictive behaviour. Whilst the steel bin was being emptied, the lady of the house, Ulla Perret, was seen talking, over her garden wall, to the council workers as they operated the lorry's skip lifting machinery. It transpires that she was giving them instructions to not return the container to its usual position, near her boundary wall, but to move it to in front of our, and adjacent properties, alongside the small white water meter box on the other side of the road. The logic of placing the bin there is without doubt questionable!

The workers, one has to wonder at their intelligence in this instance, acted on her irrational instructions, orders, commands, and repositioned the skip where she desired. Fortunately I spotted their actions just as they were preparing to drive away and questioned their actions. They confirmed that Ulla Perret had been the instigator of the move.

Having pointed out to them, firmly and politely I hope, my dissatisfaction with the new location and the illogical reason for it they returned the steel garden rubbish container to its more suitable home.

Once again the desire of the Sra Perret to move the bins from near her boundary wall, some seventy five metres from her home, to ten metres in front of our homes has been thwarted. I have no doubt this will not be her final attempt.

One in six mobile phones in the UK is contaminated with fecal bacteria, researchers found

One in six mobile phones in Britain is contaminated with fecal matter, according to new research. Experts say the most likely reason for the potentially harmful bacteria festering on so many gadgets is people failing to wash their hands properly with soap after going to the toilet.

The study also revealed a tendency among Britons to lie about their hygiene habits. Although 95% of people said they washed their hands with soap where possible, 92% of phones and 82% of hands had bacteria on them. Worryingly, 16% of hands and 16% of phones were found to harbour E. coli - bacteria of a faecal origin. Harmful E. coli (Escherichia coli) is associated with stomach upsets and has been implicated in serious cases of food poisoning such as the fatal O157 outbreak in Germany in June.

How clean is your mobile phone?

Read more in Science Daily One in six mobile phones in the UK is contaminated with fecal bacteria, researchers found

The Two Desperate Women Failed.

“It seems to me that two desperate women, one for more power and one for more money, have made a pact, an alliance” were the opening words of the final sentence of my article entitled Opposition Parties Shocked by Mayor Lorente's New Press Officer Appointment in Orihuela Costa! which I published on this weblog on the 7^th December 2010, about the appointment of Louise Clarke as the personal press officer of Monica Lorente.

Ten months have passed and it is interesting to see how the two desperate women have faired with their liaison.

They both failed in their ambitions!

In the local elections in May of this year Monica Lorente failed to be re-elected as Mayor of Orihuela. She was desperate for four more years of power but she and her Partido Popular colleagues failed to get the number of votes necessary to get sufficient Councillors elected to hold a majority in the Council Chamber.

In December 2010 when I discussed with Louise Clarke her new appointment she said “My job is to get Monica Lorente more votes on the coast,..... I will be the voice of the PP within the Town Hall in Orihuela Costa”. It would seem by the election results in May 2011, She failed in her role, as Monica Lorente and the PP lost their power. When Louise left her previous employment with the local 'Round Town Newspaper' it was to benefit from a substantial increase in salary, for more money. As a result of the departure of Monica Lorente from the position of Mayor, Louise lost her very well paid employment as press officer. Her second failure.

Where are they now?

Well Monica Lorente is still a Councillor in Orihuela but leading the Opposition, not the Government.

Louise Clarke has now returned to her old job, presumably with a much lower salary than with the PP, being a reporter with the Round Town News newspaper. In a recent article in the paper she wrote “I am a great believer in fate and after having spent the first six months of this year at the Orihuela Costa Town Hall as Press Officer (and unofficial British Residents Officer) it was fate that I would be invited, during my first official week back at RTN, to meet Denise Wesserling, the new Coastal Residents Officer in Orihuela Costa. I am happy that I had the opportunity to experience working at the Town Hall, but I am glad that my ‘sabbatical’ (as I am calling it) is over and that I am back to doing what I do best, where I belong: at RTN”. In December 2010 she didn't feel that she belonged at RTN! She felt that she belonged with Monica Lorente and the PP, and where the substantially increased salary was!

Will the Torrevieja U3A Newsletter change to a Democratic Format?

The Torrevieja U3A (University of the Third Age), of which I am member, like many of the other groups and similar organisations publishes a 'Newsletter' to pass on information about past and future events and group meetings. Like many of the publishers the U3A provides both a hard copy and an electronic copy on its Website.

Unlike many of the other contemporaries it does not offer the opportunity for readers to comment about articles.

In the recent summer edition there is an article in which a statement is made that I wished clarification of. I wrote directly to the author to seek the answer to my question but so far have not received any reply. I am aware that my email was delivered and read.

So I wrote to the Editor of the newsletter pointing out that I would like to know whether the publication offers the right to reply to comments in an article and if so what the procedure is. I was surprised to receive the reply “This is the first time I have been asked this question. I would think that if it is an article from a member or Group leader that you wish to comment on, then it is better you contact the author”. I have pointed out that I have taken that line of action without success.

It surprised me to be informed that I am the first to ask the question. Does it mean that all other readers accept everything that is included is without question? Do they read it as a notification, proclamation, or even an edict, from on high that must not be challenged or commented on? Or is it that there is an apathy to it and so few read it? Or is it that never before has it contained any contentious writings.

I decided to raise this omission of 'Letters to the Editor' or 'Readers Comments' facility with the Chairman of the Torrevieja U3A in writing as follows.

“The current editorial format of the newsletter does not offer any reader, be that from hard copy or the pages on the world wide web, the facilities to comment, or the right of reply, about an article through the publication. The current situation means that any contributor, in the majority of cases a committee member or group leader, of an article can make a statement of believed fact, or an expression of opinion, to the reading public unchallenged.

Without the facilities of replying through the publication, in its varying available sources, an alternative contributor has no way of expressing an opinion about the contents of an article to the initial readership. Any such alternative contribution may be either complimentary or contradictory. The status quo situation does not allow an option.

I would suggest that the committee being responsible for the editorial policy of the newsletter give consideration to a democratic format which allows for third person comments”.

Having received a reply of “the matter will be discussed at the next Committee meeting. I will inform you of the Committee's decision in due course”, I will wait with hope; but not too much! Will the Committee be prepared to provide a facility for the readership to comment on the words of the inner clique of the newsletter columnists? For compliments, I believe an obvious yes. For questions and criticisms, that's another matter. It can't be one without the other; or can it? Or will the decision be to continue to offer neither?