On Tuesday 07 May 2002 8:09 am, Damian Counsell wrote:
Frank Shute wrote:
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 09:34:15AM +0100, Damian wrote:
(This document also gives lie to the lazy belief that all politicians are stupid, selfish and corrupt. Many people in government around the World are talented and dedicated to public service, and I'd say these attributes were more common in UK politicians than in most of the people who criticize them and yet can't be bothered to vote---65% of the British population at the last count.)
If our politicians are more `talented & dedicated' than most people, why does it take a Peruvian politician to understand open source software, nail the MS FUD & save his taxpayer's money & confidentiality?
I have dealt with at least two UK politicians who have given an intelligent, fair and sympathetic hearing to my open source advocacy and many civil servants who haven't. In fact, of two civil servants I met who *were* sympathetic, one is in the process of retiring and one has gone to work for an open source company.
I have dealt with my local MP, Yvette Cooper, who is supposed to be both intelligent and open-minded, on two seperate occasions. Firstly on the RIP bill, and secondly on the NHS handing over £70M and total control of the IT infrastructure to burgler Bill. On both occasions she simply forwarded my letter to the appropriate person - probably without even slightly digesting the contents - and then forwarding the reply back to me. In the case of the latter one, the reply was actually worded to Yvette and not me. The very first paragraph started by *branding* me stating that I am 'obviously an Open Source Advocate', and then proceeded throughout the remainder of the letter stating that because of this, my opinions arn't worth the paper they're written on; while totally failing to answer any of the points I made out. His crowning glory was towards the end where he stated that 'anyway, the contract is only for three years', which to me does not sound like a good justification for the contract, when, at the end of the contract we will either have to WIPE all MS software from all PC's or pay MS again. One thing's for sure, we won't get the same (supposed) discount that we got this time. He couldn't even prove that the figures quoted in the press release were correct, or even state where they came from!
I'm not aware of anybody in our parliament who has the remotest concept of any of the issues involved and could address the issues with the ability the Peruvian congressman has.
*I* am aware of people in our parliament have the remotest concept of these issues. This is because I have exercised my democratic right and written to them directly.
Probably because 90% of our politicians are stupid, selfish, lazy and/or corrupt.
There *are* stupid, selfish, lazy and/or corrupt politicians in Britain. They are a minority and it's our job to vote them out. If we don't take our chances to do so then we deserve everything we get.
While I never tar everyone with the same brush, you only have to look at the state of the country to see that something drastic has to be done. As far as MS are concerned, they're on an up escalator with this country. Every new contract published is bigger than the last. And with Tony 'pull-my-string' Blair stating that all departments HAVE to be on the Government Gateway by 2005, he's practically eliminated *any* chance of a proper evaluation of alternatives to the MS/DELL DIS box. Surely that's agains the law?
What particularly tickled me was that this South American politician's letter addressed arguments against specifying open requirements in computer contracts that I have also heard from British civil servants, but please don't think I'm suggesting that public officials could have been brainwashed by a multinational corporation with an enormous marketing budget---and cute icons.
What, our civil servants have been `brainwashed' but our politicians who in their wisdom employ them and are fond of being as hospitable as possible to Mr Gates are `talented & dedicated? If you're not saying that, what exactly are you saying?
I'm saying that our politicians, who are elected for their *partiality*, have, in my direct and documented experience, been more impartial over the issues referred to in this letter than our civil servants who have been employed for their *IMpartiality*.
I do agree totally with this paragraph
I am also saying that there are A) a lot of British MPs who work hard and are good at their jobs and that B) there are millions of Britons who can't be bothered to put an 'X' on a piece of paper. That there are MPs who don't work hard and aren't good at their jobs might have something to do with the millions of people who don't care enough to do something about it.
As one of the millions of Brittons who don't vote as a rule, I will state my reasons here. 1) there is no significant difference between any of the mainstream parties 2) labour is now more conservative than conservative ever was 3) there is not one party that I have any faith, or belief in. While I know that my apathy will not improve but only increase the problem, I will in principle not vote for someone I have no faith in. -- Gary Stainburn This email does not contain private or confidential material as it may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000