Vacuum cleaner euthanasia or not?

Can't show cable as the retraction mechanism says no!

My vacuum cleaner friend has survived another day's work!

The right rear wheel fell off 5 times but the left one only came off 3 times. The cable rewind mechanism constantly grabs the cable back trying to restrict my roaming area or pull the plug from the wall. To turn it on or off means plugging it in or unplugging it from the power socket in the wall as the plastic on/off switch doesn't work. The HEPA filter is randomly ejected from the rear of the cleaner, depositing its collected dust on the cleaned floor, depending on the strength of the air flow and the heat of the plastic moulding surrounding it.

I am wondering if it is time for retirement, or even euthanasia, of my little friend. Is it cruel to make it continue to struggle, to work on, when the prognosis can only be for worse to come.

What makes my decision more difficult is that it was only brought into our family on 28^th January 2010 when we adopted it from the Carrefour Home brand stable at a special offer price of £51.78 (€60.00 in pretend money). I like to push the boat out occasionally!

I have to consider my little friend's pride, will it feel it has given us value for money? Will it consider that we have understood its little foibles as mitigation towards its survival?

I think I'll have to think about it a little longer. Perhaps modern science will come up with a solution for extending useful life. If all else fails I could use some sticky back plastic (no trade name advertising on my weblog) as a temporary life support. My vacuum cleaner friend survives for another day's work.

The Woodsman’s Cottage Mystery.

 For many years the villagers have wondered about Woodsman’s Cottage. The small secluded building stands like a sentry on the edge of common land at the entrance to the ancient wood. It has been uninhabited for some twenty plus years. The small garden surrounding it becoming very overgrown. The crimson flowered rhododendrons have taken total command of their domain, defeating any other shrubs that may have survived alongside them in the past, allowing only a small glimpse of the red brick cottage to passers-by.

The older villagers can remember when Bill Clayton lived there but his sudden departure from village life was unexplained then and remains so to this day. He was a private man who liked the isolation of his home on the outskirts of the village. As far as those who thought they knew him were aware, Bill had no family. He was an only child, his parents had died, and he was single. There are many rumours about his disappearance. Had he just decided to move away, had the witches of the wood spirited him away, was he dead; no one knows the truth.

The cottage hadn't had any visitors until the day that the 'Property for Auction' sign went up. In fact none of the villagers saw the sign being put up. If it hadn't been for the Auctioneers name and telephone number the mystery would have continued. Several of the more inquisitive locals had made telephone enquiries pretending to be potential bidders at the forthcoming event. All they could find out were the basic details of the cottage, and when and where the auction was to be held. No news about Bill or the seller if it's not him. The mystery continued on.

On auction day a couple of volunteer village spies attended the sale as did John Messenger. He desperately wanted to be, had to be, the new owner of the property he'd coveted for many years. Bill had refused to sell it to him, many times, and they had argued about this.

John found himself bidding against two others in the room. One he recognised as a builder from the nearby market town, and the other was Sarah Clarke another local villager. He couldn't let them buy Woodsman's Cottage. The builder started the bidding at the guide price of £80,000: the battle commenced between the three protagonists. The bids increased by £5000 a time quickly reaching £125,000 and then slowing to £1,000 increases. Sarah stopped bidding first and then the builder leaving John with what he thought was the winning bid at £139,000. This was £14,000 above what he could really afford, but needs must as he felt it was his right to own the property.

The auctioneer started his closing speech: “The bid is with the gentleman seated on the right at one hundred thirty-nine thousand pounds for the first time.” After allowing a short pause he continued: “At one hundred thirty-nine thousand pounds for the second time. Make no mistake I will be selling it.” John's heart was banging, trying to get out of his chest. The air in the room seemed to be thinner as he couldn't get his breath properly. The room had become hotter, his hands were becoming clammy. “This is your last chance ladies and gentlemen: the bid is at one hundred thirty-nine thousand pounds for the third time,” the auctioneer said as he raised his gavel.

“One hundred forty-five thousand” shouted one of the auctioneer’s colleagues, holding a telephone to his ear, sat at the table to the right of the auctioneer, as the gavel started its downward journey.

“We have a new bid on the telephone at one hundred forty-five thousand pounds,” announced the auctioneer, stopping the falling hammer in mid-flight, as he looked in John's direction, in hope of an increased bid from him.

John felt his world fall from beneath his feet. Although desperate to own the cottage; he couldn't respond to this new much higher bid. His ambition had been pole-axed. He looked at the auctioneer and slowly shook his head, left and right. After a new closing speech the gavel was brought down onto the block with a resounding bang. The mystery telephone buyer had won the day with the single surprise bid.

The villagers still had no news about either Bill or the new owner. Woodsman's Cottage was not going to give up its secrets easily, the mystery surrounding it lives on . . .

Edited: 02.12.2012

Continuation story: The mysterious O'Neills 

North Slope By Michael Parker

I have finished reading North Slope By Michael Parker. Click on the link to read all about the book rather than me repeating it here. Michael Parker is a new author to me and I am very pleased to have come across this book. The plot is fast moving with interesting twists and turns. The characters are explained in enough detail to understand them. The description of the Alaska weather and the hardships endured by the cast of the novel bring a chill to the readers bones.

I recommend this book and will include Micheal Parker's other titles in my future reading list.

Hostile Witness by Rebecca Forster

I have just finished reading 'Hostile Witness' by Rebecca Forster .

This is an excellent court room thriller with many twists and turns in the plot to keep ones interest. It is a fast moving story with very good character analysis and court room scenes.

It follows the trial of sixteen-year-old Hannah Sheraton who is charged with arson and the murder of her step-grandfather. There is the added complication that he was the chief justice of the California Supreme court. Her mother pleads with Josie Baylor-Bates, an old college friend for help in defending Hannah. As Josie investigates the facts surrounding the alleged crime and the complications of the personal life of the family she gets further involved than a lawyer ought to.

This is the first book by Rebecca Forster that I have read. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, having difficulty in putting it down. I recommend it as a very good and interesting read.

Eat your broccoli: Another mechanism discovered by which sulforaphane prevents cancer

Researchers in the Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University have discovered yet another reason why the "sulforaphane"compound in broccoli and other cruciferous vegetables is so good for you -- it provides not just one, but two ways to prevent cancer through the complex mechanism of epigenetics.

Read more in ScienceDailyEat your broccoli: Another mechanism discovered by which sulforaphane prevents cancer

British Expat denied appeal over expat voting decision.

The Telegraph newspaper reports that James Preston's, a British expat, attempt to force the Government to give him the right to vote in elections was recently overthrown by judges has been refused permission to appeal.

He went to the High Court last year to challenge the ban on Britons voting after they have lived abroad for 15 years. He argued that the time limit was an infringement of his rights under EU law to move to other member states without discrimination, but the case was summarily dismissed in December. He then lodged permission to take the case to the Court of Appeal, but was informed last week this application has been denied.

 Read the full article here: James Preston denied appeal over expat voting decision - Telegraph.

This is a blow for many of us who continue to have to pay taxes in the UK but choose to live outside the UK for what ever reason. Shouldn't it be 'No taxation without representation'?

More success against the benefit cheats in Spain

The British Embassy in Madrid website, 'UK in Spain' published an article today confirming that UK Benefit Fraud investigators have recently enjoyed more success in the fight against benefit cheats in Spain.

In one of the latest cases to go to prosecution, Debbie Williamson from Rotherham was sentenced at Sheffield Crown Court to 18 months immediate imprisonment for having stolen UK benefits between 2004 and 2009. Ms Williamson had been claiming a number of non-exportable benefits from the UK, including income support. She denied having any connection with Spain, but investigators established she owned property in Valencia, had made regular cash withdrawals abroad and had her daughter in a local Spanish school. In total Ms. Williamson stole £42,558.72 from the British taxpayer by claiming benefits she was not entitled to after her circumstances changed.

The full article can be read here: More success against the benefit cheats in Spain. 

This is excellent news.

Bob Houliston resigns postion as Councillor for the Coast

Councillor Bob Houliston

When I wrote my articles 'Will CLARO partner the Partido Popular in Orihuela?' followed by 'Together we can! - Oh Really!' , and 'CRAPPOL party inauguration' I never thought I would be reporting on the resignation of Bob Houliston so soon.

Today Bob Houliston leader of the CLARO party resigned as Councillor for Orihuela Costa and as a member of the tripartite government team of the Orihuela Town Council.

His letter of resignation to the Mayor of Orihuela issued as a press release reads as follows:

“Dear Alcalde,
I regret to inform you of my decision to resign, as of today, from the municipal government of Orihuela and from my post as Councillor for the Coast, Beaches and International Residents
My decision has been caused by the present near paralysis of an important sector of the administration of the coast resulting from the sudden and abrupt transfer to Orihuela on 23 January, 2012 of the Resident Engineer. With this transfer, I have lost the services of a competent and very experienced officer. I have also lost the only technical officer working on the coast, dedicated to the supervision of works and contracts and authorised to co-sign with me, work completion certificates and bills essential for the payment of invoices. For this reason, in the course of the past month since her transfer a number of invoices have not been authorised for payment. The legal, administrative and financial problems which this creates are already considerable. I am not prepared to take political responsibility for resolving problems which others have caused..
As you know, this situation is the latest in a series of incidents resulting from the systematic refusal of an element in the government to cooperate and coordinate their activities which concern the coast with me, the councillor geographically competent From the first day I have been aware of their opposition to me and to my having the means necessary to carry out my work for the coast. In the meeting of the councillors forming the majority on the council, the government group, held on on 16 July, 2011 of which I was not informed and to which I was not invited, the conclusions of the negotiations for the inclusion in the government of the Centro Liberal Renovador (CLR) party were presented. Needless to say, I was not informed either of these negotiations or consulted on aspects relating to my responsibilities.
Arriving at this meeting by chance, I was obliged to block a proposal to divide the responsibilites which you granted to me as councillor for the coast on my entry into the government and to share these responsibilities with another councillor. I also had to block a proposal to remove the post of personal advisor to help me with my work on the coast, a post which you had previously agreed to, on a full-time basis and which was subsequently reduced to a part-time basis at the insistence of Pedro Mancebo and the CLR party. Finally, at the same meeting I was obliged to object to the title of the responsibilities to be given to Pedro Mancebo as Councillor for the Coordination OF the Services of the Coast, considering that as councillor for the coast, I should be responsible for the coordination of my services. The title of Pedro Mancebo's responsiblities was changed to Councillor for the Coordination of Services WITH the Coast..
While the preposition in the title of Pedro Mancebo's competences was changed from “of” to “with” I am convinced that the intention behind his original proposal remained unchanged. To illustrate this belief, you will remember that I objected to the definition of his competences included in Decree 513 signed by you on 16 September, 2011 which gave him responsibility for approving (visto bueno) all proposed agreements, decisions (resoluciones), decrees and other documents relating to the work of the councillor for the coast. At the same time the Decree gave him responsibility for “optimising” all resources be they personnel, material, economic or budgetary of the municipal office of the Town Hall in Orihuela Costa.
These responsibilities created in effect the post of a “Controller” (Concejal Controlador) of the councillor for the coast. Regretably, despite my proposals aimed at seeking a consensus on the text, these responsibilities remained essentially unchaged in the modified Decree which you signed on 16 December, 2011 and which I was notified of on 6 February, 2012,
An example of the “optimisation” of the human resources of the coast can be seen in the decision taken by two CLR councillors and, I suppose, the Councillor for Coordinating Services with the coast, to transfer with 6 minutes notice for “organisational necessity” the Resident Engineer who had worked for 12 years on the coast. The officer in question was of such importance, given her responsibility for supervising contracts for basic services, the quality of the beaches and the budgetary procedures, the coast is suffering from her removal. The contract engineer who was appointed in December as a reinforcement, cannot be expected to fulfil all these functions. He does not have power of signature. Unfortunately, I am not aware of any serious effort to solve this problem or the more general problem of insufficient staff, by providing the coast with the appropriate number of qualified, permanent officials needed to look after the needs of 35% of the population of Orihuela, almost the same number as those living in Orihuela city.
I do not wish to go into the detail of all the incidents of non-cooperation and the placing of obstacles to the carrying out of my work which have been caused by the CLR element in the government over the past 7 months and which continue to this day, The consequences have been to divide and weaken the management of the coast against the interest of the people living on the coast and their democratically expressed wishes as to who should represent them.
This long and painful experience convinces me of the impossibility of carrying out my work in the interest of Orihuela Costa. I am therefore obliged to resign from my post as Councillor for the Coast and as a member of your government. I will, of course, continue as an elected member of the Corporation. to work for the interests of Orihuela Costa.
I should like to state that during the past 8 months, I have formed and will retain the highest appreciation of your personal and professional qualities and those of the majority of members of your government”.

This will mean that the town council is now split into two distinct armies; the tripartite governing team of the PSOE, Los Verdes and CLR will now only have 12 Councillors, whilst the PP oposition party will have an equal number of Councillors; with Bob Houliston holding the balancing council seat bringing the total to 25. Monserrate Guillén Sáez as Mayor of Orihuela, and leader of the tripartite alliance will have a difficult time with getting legislation approved through the Town Council with Bob Houliston having the floating, deciding vote.

The alternative, feared by many who have experienced the previous government periods of the Partido Popular party in Orihuela, is that Bob Houliston will give his permanent allegiance to the PP in return for being giving total Councillor responsibility for the Orihuela Costa area. This would be the achievement, pinnacle, of his personal ambition for totalitarian control of the coastal region. What cost for power!

Torrevieja U3A Committee wanted members votes but now not their opinions.

Following on from my article 'U3A Chairman says 5 days is enough time!' I received a note from the Chairman “I note your comments regarding the distribution of the Minutes, which I will take to the next Committee meeting for discussion”. I can't ask for fairer than that can I?

The Chairman's reply started me thinking about the structure of the new Committee, made up of a combination of eight re-elected, six of them voted for 'en bloc', no opportunity given to the membership to vote on individuals, and four new members. An increase of one above the the 2011 number. Two of the new members were previously co-opted to the Committee and this was the ratification of their positions, with the remaining two being new nominations.

During a discussion about the U3A AGM the subject of the selection of nominees for committee members was raised. It was suggested that during the meeting the Chairman mentioned that several nominations had been received by the due date and that those had been reduced down in number to the two names proposed and voted upon during the AGM. I expressed the opinion that there were only two as if there had been more than two nominations the membership would have been asked to vote on all names and the two receiving the highest votes would have been elected.

To clarify this point I wrote to the Chairman asking: “Could you clarify whether or not more than two valid nominees were received. If I am wrong and there were more than two, what was the criteria for the selection of the names finally put forward for voting”. He confirmed that “Initially there were five nominees for these posts. As the nomination procedure progressed, three of the nominees elected to withdraw and instead put themselves forward, offering their full support with other functions outside of the committee. Two candidates wished to proceed with their nominations”.

This has led me to wondering. Why couldn't or weren't all five nominees names presented to the members at the AGM to be voted on, with the result based on the two with the highest votes joining the Committee? What persuasions, inducements or pressures were used to influence the three nominees to withdraw? Were the two final names chosen to ensure the Committee was made up to suit 'the establishment', to maintain as close as possible the status quo?

As an aside consideration, I find it curious, that despite a previous comment by the Chairman “As our U3A expands so does the workload of each committee member” that the new members are “without portfolio” despite some of the re-elected members having two areas of responsibility.

It is interesting to note that of the twelve members of the Committee there are three husband and wife pairs. A cynic might think of the term nepotism. I have to wonder if this arrangement brings the widest possible variation of opinions to its meetings. Will there be a diversity of views expressed and votes cast given the family ties? There is also a question in relation to the equal number make-up and its effect on a casting vote where an equilibrium of votes is cast if a difference of opinion materialises. Assuming such a situation could ever happen in the close knit clique. Does the Chairman have two votes?

The question of the diversity of views presented at Committee meetings interests me so I wrote to the Chairman: “I hope that you would agree with me that the U3A Committee as a whole is, and the members as individuals are, elected by the members of the association with the collective responsibility to manage the Torrevieja U3A, on behalf of and for the benefit of the members. Therefore what are the current procedures to ensure that the committee members canvas the spectrum of opinions of the association's general members on matters relating to policy decisions, which affect members, prior to discussing and voting on such items at committee meetings? At the present time, as far as I am aware as a member, the general membership has no knowledge of items to be discussed by the committee at its meetings and therefore is unable to express any opinions prior to a decision being made. I would appreciate your clarification on this matter”.

I was surprised by what I consider to be a negative, introverted, insecure reply: “Having read and digested your comments and sought the views of fellow committee members, our response is as follows:- We believe that, by being elected by the membership at an AGM, the Committee has the authorisation to act in the best interests of the Association. The Committee members therefore believe that they would be abrogating their responsibilities if they were to canvass members’ views in advance of each policy discussion and decision. Members who wish to be involved in these discussions and decisions have the annual opportunity to put themselves forward for election to the Committee. The Committee is continually in discussion regarding ways to better improve communication between itself and the membership”.

It would seem that the twelve Committee members wanted the votes of the membership at the AGM but now don't want to know their (U3A members) varied opinions on proposed changes to the running of the Association. The Committee twelve believe they know best!

Elected Town Councillors, County Council Councillors and Members of Parliament have the authorisation to act in the best interests of the residents of their (elected representatives) towns , counties and the country, but they still canvass the views of the constituency electorate. They don't believe that they would be “abrogating their responsibilities” if they canvass, listen to and consider the views of the electorate in advance of a policy discussion and decision.

It would not be too difficult for the Chairman to use the already “very popular”, in his words, cascade email system to pass on agendas of Committee meetings to allow the membership the opportunity to have knowledge of and express if they want “views in advance of each policy discussion and decision”. It is used successfully to inform the membership about other information. Without the will though there will not be a way.

It seems ironic really considering that within the aims of the Torrevieja U3A are the statements: "To encourage and enable people to help each other to share their knowledge, skills, interests and experience” and “The U3A consists of people who undertake to learn and to help others to learn. One of the guiding principles of the U3A is that those who teach shall also learn and those who learn shall also teach”, that the Committee doesn't want to learn of the opinions of the membership.

Overall the Committee carries out it's responsibilities in a satisfactory manner, but they are never too old to learn! Surely that's the value of the U3A!

CRAPPOL party inauguration.

This morning at its first press conference the CRAPPOL party confirmed that it has been establish to make up the governing party of the Orihuela Town Council following the demise of the tripartite political group, made up of the PSOE, Los Verdes and CLR/CLARO parties, because of the withdrawal of CLARO, and the resignation of the Mayor.

Monica Lorente the Chairman of the new party, and future Alcaldesa, emphasised in great depth that CRAPPOL is a single united party, and not a bipartite group, a marriage of the PP and CLARO. She went on to introduce her Deputy Chairman, Robert Houliston, paying him the compliment of making the point that in her opinion, as seen by his recent political strategic moves, he did not believe in honour within politics and therefore was the ideal choice to support her at this time, but who knows in the future.

She said “Her party did not agree with the previous administration's belief that the finances of the Orihuela Municipality were in a desperate situation, needing a minimal spending budget but continuing with the objective of a good quality of service to the residents of the municipality”. She continued: “One of my new party's policies, as I have done in my previous Mayoral stint, is to spend recklessly for the enjoyment of myself and my fellow PP Councillors and party members. The residents have no right to expect my government to spend their taxes on basic council services and investment for the future”.

When asked about the coastal region of the borough she said: “The only value it has to my government is to bring in lots of money via taxes. My party colleagues unanimously agree with me, or they are sacked, that the extranjero residents of the area are to be considered as enemies of our regime. They should stop complaining and be grateful that we let them live in their illegal, unfinished ghettos.”

Bob Houliston, after beseeching his domineering leader's permission to speak, said he was proud that he had been instrumental in the breakup of the inferior tripartite government. He felt no remorse for misleading those who voted for the CLR/CLARO in the May 2011 elections as it helped his personal power programme. He mentioned that he was hopeful that Monica would keep her word and, as a reward for his excellent backstabbing, give him totalitarian rule over the coastal area. If so it would be renamed as Boborihuela Costa.

Without allowing any questions from the assembled press, the meeting was brought to an abrupt end with the new Mayor indicating that her entourage had to leave for an expensive menú del dia meal paid for from Council funds. As they were leaving they could be heard signing 'a cappella' – “Money, money, money we just want your money”.

Believe it or believe it not!