This medium difficulty walk in Mid Dartmoor is of six miles takes in an old potato starch factory and the beautiful Postbridge waterfall...

I'd decided to put myself into the capable hands of the Dartmoor National Park Authority to find the waterfall on the East Dart river as I followed its audio walk.

Having printed off the route map so I could reference my OS map, and downloaded the audio onto my iPod I turned up at the car park in Postbridge (SX 648 789) on an overcast day. I was looking to take some long exposure shots at the waterfall so an overcast day was perfect, but I'd packed a mac and sunglasses anyway - and needed both!

Leave the car park and turn left onto the road and admire the ancient clapper bridge (SX 648 789). According to the audio, if you can see the stones in front of the clapper bridge from the other bridge then you will be able to cross the waterfall. If they are covered by water the river will be too high to cross. I'm happy to say the stones were visible and I was able to cross later on.

Just over the road bridge the footpath is on your left through a wooden gate. Follow it along and past Hartyland House (SX 646 794), which was built in the 19th century.

Follow the path along past some bamboo bushes where the path will start to climb. On the left you can see Roundypark enclosure which you'll pass on the way back. For now carry up the hill to Hartland Tor (SX 642 799) for some good views of the area.

From here the next stop is The Sheepfold, but don't walk directly to it, follow the path along parallel with river (but higher) and after crossing second granite wall take a right and follow it along to it.

I did wonder whether to bother taking a closer look, but it was worth a little detour as it's a unique piece of building work. The Sheepfold (SX 645 808) built by John and Thomas Hullett at the beginning of the 19th century. The same brothers who built Hartyland House. It was built as a place where starch was manufactured from growing potatoes. The starch was used for the main sails of the boats.

The starch factory business failed and it was taken over by a shepherd in the 1830s/1840s, who restored it for use with lambing. The design is quite unusual for the moor.

With the five-barred gate behind me I headed away from The Sheepfold across an area of gorse to the right of the mound and ended up back on the path that runs from Hartland Tor. It wasn't too long before I came to tracks leading down to the river so followed them down, then located the Beehive Hut (SX 639 814) a little to the right. There are no bees here! This was a cache for tools and possibly a shelter used by tin miners.

There is path which follows the East Dart river up to the waterfall, though there is a smaller waterfall on your right on the way up - this isn't it!  The main waterfall (SX 628 811) is a lovely place for a picnic.

I managed to snap a couple of long exposure shots before the heavens opened and drenched me and my camera. Safely under my waterproof I crossed the top of the waterfall and followed the path parallel to the river, down to a stile (SX 637 814).

The path follows the river and is quite pretty and you can see a change in the landscape here. Along the path at SX 639 812 are two granite slabs which make a small clapper bridge.  Beyond that is a dry ditch which is the start of Powdermills Leat.

The last stop on the audio tour is Roundypark Cairn (SX 639 797). In the centre of the circular, prehistoric enclosure is a granite monument. This is a Bronze Age burial cairn.

The path takes you back to the car park at Postbridge and the sun had come out. I was still feeling a little damp so I visited the shop by the road bridge for a take out hot chocolate and sat by the clapper bridge, enjoying the last glow of the afternoon.

I can recommend the audio walks. Find them here

o Want to take this walk with you? Use our option. Or download it to your phone to check on the way.

View Postbridge waterfall walk in a larger map

o When walking on Dartmoor please ensure you take the right equipment with you, eg, waterproof, walking boots, water, a map, plus your common sense.

Dennis Skinner said he believed David Miliband was the candidate who would fare best against David Cameron

The veteran Labour left-winger Dennis Skinner today announced his backing for David Miliband's Labour leadership bid.

Skinner, the so-called "Beast of Bolsover", said he believed the shadow foreign secretary was the candidate who would fare best against David Cameron.

The Bolsover MP has been a perennial maverick throughout his four decades in parliament, and holds totemic status for many on Labour's Left.

Although his influence has arguably waned over recent years, Miliband's team will hope the endorsement helps convince traditionalists that he is the right man for the top job.

In quotes posted on Miliband's website, Skinner said: "For many Labour people this hasn't been an easy election to call. All of the candidates are of the centre left, they are all Labour. That isn't the issue here.

"The big question is who are the Tories afraid of? Who is the best candidate to stand up against Cameron at the despatch box? Who has the best chance to beat Cameron in an election?

"For me the best choice is David Miliband and that is why I will be supporting him as next Labour leader."

Skinner had originally nominated backbencher Diane Abbott for leader, as she was struggling to get enough support to make the final ballot.

The winner of the contest is due to be announced on the eve of this month's party conference in Manchester.

The former Hull East MP cannot wait for the Super League play-off derby between the city's old rivals

In the 46 years since he first arrived in Hull as a student, John Prescott has had plenty to occupy his mind other than rugby league. But now, as a director of the Hull KR club based in his former constituency in the east of the city, and without any need to avoid offending supporters of Hull FC for psephological reasons, Baron Prescott of Kingston-upon-Hull is relishing the prospect of a first sudden-death derby between the old rivals in tomorrow's Super League play-offs.

"Will you be going to the game, Lord Prescott?" he was asked this week in his first rugby-related interview. "It's John," he replied. "And yes, I bloody will. The chairman's going to pick me up about four o'clock, and we'll get issued with our special visas for going to west Hull that we've had granted by the Foreign Office.

"Anyone who doesn't know this city could never understand how passionate the people are about rugby league, and how they are divided between black and white on the west side of the river, and red and white on the other."

Prescott's crash course in Hull's sporting obsession, one that seems to have been reinforced rather than diluted by the two seasons that the amber and black of Hull City spent in football's Premier League, began before he became the MP for Hull East in 1970. "In the early days as a union official, I would ask why my branch officer wasn't negotiating with people from certain ships," he says. "It turned out he was a Rovers fan, and if they'd lost, he wouldn't have anything to do with black and white."

So by 1980, when Hull and Rovers contested the Challenge Cup final at Wembley, he was familiar with their rivalry. "I really began to understand the culture when the town emptied for the weekend," he says with a chuckle. "But for all that passion between the supporters, there was great spirit too - many of them would even share buses down to London, split between the two teams."

For another few years after that final - won narrowly by Rovers, whose supporters continue to celebrate the result every other Sunday in the 10-5 Bar at Craven Park - the two teams continued to dominate rugby league. They also contested two finals of the old John Player Trophy, both held at Hull City's old Boothferry Park ground, but by the end of the 1980s they had been overtaken by Widnes and Wigan, and left with serious financial problems.

Neither of them qualified for the original Super League of 1996, although the class warrior in Prescott prefers to dwell on a doomed attempt to force them to merge. "Then along comes Super League, and the Murdoch press saying that the two teams should come together and share the new football stadium being built by the council," he says. "Well that was never going to happen, was it? The rivalry runs too deep for that."

Instead Hull FC, slightly the more glamorous of the two clubs with more corporate backing from the west of the city, escaped from a chaotic period under the former tennis entrepreneur David Lloyd to secure a Super League future with an opportunist takeover of Gateshead Thunder in 1999, then fell on their feet when the council capitalised on a telecommunications windfall by investing in the KC Stadium which the black and whites share with Hull City.

Hull KR were still flirting with administration in the lower leagues but since the arrival of Neil Hudgell as chairman and his appointment of Justin Morgan as coach in 2005, they have shown the city can easily support two Super League clubs, finishing above Hull FC in the 2008 and 2009 seasons.

Prescott came on board around four years ago. "One of the conditions of Super League membership was that they had to be more involved in the community and they asked me if I would work alongside them in improving the stadium and the way it worked with the other social provision in east Hull," he explains. "It's a great privilege because I obviously have very strong feelings for the area after serving as its MP for so long."

He has enjoyed the involvement so much that he attends the odd away match, including last Saturday's against the Crusaders in Wrexham, close to his roots on either side of the north Wales border.

"That was funny as well, because in the boardroom before our match we were watching Hull play Leeds - and you could hear all the Rovers supporters cheering so loudly for a team from Leeds, playing against a team from Hull. It was most odd. But it's a great community rivalry and a great story now they are playing each other in the play-offs."

George Osborne wouldn't need to make these benefit cuts if he tackled the biggest type of fraud in the UK - that of tax evasion

George Osborne is making political capital out of seeking to save £4bn on the benefits bill, happy for those making the claims he's targeting to be called lifestyle choice fraudsters and layabouts - all, supposedly, because of the need to tackle the hole in the government's deficit. But he wouldn't need to make these cuts if he tackled the biggest category of fraud in the UK economy - that of tax evasion.

The tax gap is real. It's the difference between the tax that should be collected from the UK economy if HM Revenue & Customs knew everything that was going on and the tax it actually collects. HMRC claims the gap is £40bn a year with well over £30bn of that being tax evasion and a much smaller part - less than £5bn - being tax avoidance. The difference between the two is important. Evasion is illegal - it's fraud, in other words. Avoidance is the smart trickery my colleagues in the accountancy profession play.

The trouble is HMRC has these estimates wrong. I estimate that tax evasion - the issue I'm concerned about here - costs about £70bn a year. My estimate is based on the rate of VAT evasion that HMRC admits to - which I calculate to be an average of about 13.7% over the past seven years.

That means more than £1 in every £8 of VAT due in the UK is evaded. Shockingly, the World Bank has recently confirmed in a study of the size of the cash economy in 162 economies that they agree almost exactly with this ratio for the UK, suggesting on average that the UK shadow economy is about 13.5% of GDP, and on an upward trend.

Despite this evidence HMRC refuses to recognise that if VAT is evaded at the rate its admits then it follows that this proportion of income tax, corporation tax and national insurance is also evaded - which is an untenable position on its part. No business person puts cash in their pocket to evade VAT and then declares income tax on the wages and profits paid out of that cash. Those other taxes are evaded as well, and by as much - if not more - than VAT, simply because VAT doesn't apply to all businesses but income tax and national insurance always do. And as a result £70bn is lost to tax evasion a year. That's enough to pay our way out of our current financial crisis.

But this does not happen by chance. This cash has to get into the hands of fraudulent traders - and not much of it comes from them trading with each other. Most of it comes from the public who, when offered a deal for cash take it. Builders are the classic case everyone points too. But so too are after-school tutors these days. And nannies and domestic cleaners paid cash in hand. And those who trade through car boot sales. And even people who trade on eBay and "forget" to tell HMRC. The list of ways cash creeps out of the tax system and into the shadow economy are numerous.

And the fact is that cash on this scale does not just come from those committing benefit fraud. Cash on this scale comes from the middle and upper classes - Guardian readers among them, no doubt. Every time you pay cash, in these ways and more, you contribute to the tax gap. You deny the government the cash it needs to preserve public services. You facilitate fraud, even if you're not guilty of it. You undermine the NHS. And your children's education, and all those other services you value. And you help deny benefits to those who need them. The joy of tax is that it pays for all these things. Tax evasion denies them to us.

If there is a "big society" - not in the way Cameron describes it but in the way we believe in the society we live in and enjoy the services our state provides - then the cash economy directly undermines it. That's the real consequence of the cash deal to save a bit on the cost of cramming for an A* GCSE.

And that's a challenge for all who do believe in society, the rule of law, the value of government services and the democracy we enjoy. Are you willing to pay by cheque or card, to demand a receipt, to operate PAYE on your domestic staff, to clamp down on tax evasion, and say so? It's a choice you can make. You can choose to pay tax. Will you do that to keep the services you want?

Ask yourself that the next time you could evade tax. And live with your conscience if you contribute to the tax gap - a gap we, and those who rely on the state, can no longer afford.

Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green party, will today at the first party conference call for MPs to be able to job share in a bid to attract more women into politics. Is this a good idea?

Dave Hill on Boris Johnson's decision to stand for re-election as mayor of London

o Hugh Robertson worried about damage to sport's integrity
o Minister will raise issue at Commonwealth level

The government insists that global action is needed to stamp out the "appalling scourge" of illegal gambling that is threatening to destroy the integrity of some sports. The minister for sport and the Olympics, Hugh Robertson, believes it is vital action is taken to prevent illegal betting syndicates from operating in the subcontinent and the Far East.

Cricket and snooker are embroiled in betting scandals, with a number of Pakistan cricketers being investigated for spot-fixing and the former snooker world champion John Higgins having been fined and suspended this week for giving the misleading impression he would take a bribe to lose frames.

Although Higgins was cleared of the more serious charges of conspiring to fix frames or matches, both his and the sport's reputation were sullied by his naive behaviour.

Should the allegations against Pakistan's cricketers be proven correct, it would do untold damage to the integrity of the game. Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir have all denied any wrongdoing.

Robertson aims to raise the issue at the Commonwealth sports ministers' meeting during next month's Commonwealth Games in Delhi. And with all the major cricketing nations being members of the Commonwealth, he is hoping to sow the seeds of a coordinated plan of action to help tackle the problem.

He said: "As we appear to have seen with what's happened in cricket, not all these problems originate inside the UK betting market.

"As long as there are substantial illegal betting syndicates or underground betting syndicates in both the subcontinent and in the Far East, it's extremely difficult to police this globally.

"One of the things we intend to address at the Commonwealth sports ministers' meeting - I wrote to the Indian sports minister about this a couple of days ago - is to talk about this and see if there's anything we can do on a global basis to try to tackle this.

"It is the most appalling scourge on sport, and the moment you lose the integrity that lies behind sport, team sport particularly is lost."

Robertson is confident the UK government will do its bit, starting by implementing the recommendations made by the former Liverpool and Premier League chief executive Rick Parry, who chaired a commission set up to investigate the gambling-related threat of corruption in sport.

"Domestically, we have to be sure that we have the right anti-corruption regime in place," Robertson said.

"I have just taken delivery of a report that was instigated under the previous government. It is a fantastic report; we're in the process of implementing it in full. I believe that will give us a very robust regime domestically."

Robertson was speaking at the Balfour Beatty London Youth Games Hall of Fame evening.

The sports minister believes initiatives such as the London Youth Games are vital to helping Britain fulfil the promise made to the International Olympic Committee to inspire more young people to take up sport, a vow that helped London secure the 2012 Games.

But Robertson accepts inspiring anybody will be difficult if they are unable to believe what they are watching is genuine. He added: "Anybody who pays money at the gate to go to watch any sports fixture wants to know that they are getting what they see in front of them.

"That's why I think the level of public condemnation of what we've seen in cricket has been so great, why so many people are appalled by it.

"It just attacks everything that sport is about and we've got to do everything we possibly can to stamp it out."

Jonathan Djanogly paid investigators to find out who was behind 'malicious allegations' made about his expenses claims

Downing Street today backed justice minister Jonathan Djanogly after it emerged he had hired a firm of private detectives to investigate his aides and colleagues.

The prime minister's spokesman conceded that the Tory MP may have "overreacted" after rumours appeared about him in the press, but said he still had David Cameron's "full confidence".

Djanogly was forced to defend his actions after the Daily Telegraph obtained a copy of the report by the private investigators, Morris Chase International.

It showed that last year the then-shadow solicitor general had instructed the firm to conduct "discreet inquiries under the pretext of writing a newspaper article" to establish the views of people including a former council leader.

The company said all the information was obtained legally and the Huntingdon MP insisted he would "never have contemplated condoning anything unlawful or dishonest".

But one of those targeted, Tory ex-leader of Huntingdon council Derek Holley, called on Djanogly to "consider his position" in government.

"Quite frankly I was just appalled by it all," Holley told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "I have been in local politics and associated with national politics for 34 years, and I have never, ever experienced anything like this in the whole of that time."

In a statement, Djanogly said: "Following a series of malicious allegations made against me in newspapers last year, I felt I had to act to find out who was spreading these untrue stories.

"I instructed a firm of private investigators to try to find out the source of these stories because I was extremely upset that my private family life had been invaded.

"A report of their investigation was prepared and sent to me on a confidential basis and I am very disappointed to see the report released publicly without my consent.

"I would never have contemplated condoning anything unlawful or dishonest in the investigations, and the investigators have assured me that their inquiries were carried out in an entirely lawful manner.

"I am sorry if some people judge that I made a mistake. With hindsight I can see that I may have overreacted, but I was being subjected to very malicious, anonymous attacks on my family.

"I paid for the cost of the investigation myself and did not claim it back on parliamentary expenses."

Asked this morning if Cameron had full confidence in Djanogly, the prime minister's spokesman replied: "Yes."

"The PM will judge him on his performance as a minister," the spokesman said. "He has said himself that with hindsight he may have overreacted."

Michael Morris, a director of the firm, told the Telegraph: "All the information obtained for and reported to Mr Djanogly was developed legally. The use of pretext is legal as long as the requirements and principles of the Data Protection Act are adhered to."

The newspaper said the report cost Djanogly, who is a solicitor and reputedly one of the richest members of the Commons, more than £5,000.

It reportedly showed that election agent Sir Peter Brown resigned over the expenses scandal and not, as suggested at the time, ill health.

Another senior Tory is said to have told the undercover investigator: "Sir Peter was very upset and unhappy about being lied to. He knew Jonathan's cleaner was his au pair. We all knew her because she used to hand out drinks at constituency social events."

The report also contained information about an alleged "conspiracy" to undermine the MP.

"There does not appear to be any current activity among the conspirators to revive the expenses allegations," it concluded. "This is because they do not have the time or resources to conduct investigations to trace the au pairs.

"All four sources say that you have been damaged severely politically. Brown said, 'Jonathan has lived to die another day'."

News of Djanogly's actions emerged just hours after the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, had condemned Labour's habit of chopping and changing its ministerial team.

In a speech, Clegg accused the previous government of being driven by headlines, and added: "This government recognises that constant reshuffling of the ministerial deck ... is not conducive to good government, and that we will aspire to greater stability in the way ministers are allowed to govern."

So, to Qur'an burning then. What the Dickens is that about, eh? Is it just a book?

Well no, it isn't. I doubt Pastor Redneck would be satisfied if all paper copies of the Qur'an were destroyed but all e-books remained in tact.

Unless I'm sorely mistaken, his issue isn't with some bound bits of paper you can pick up for £5.99 in Waterstones: it's with ideas.

Moreover, the Pastor has taken issue with offending ideas being captured permanently.

Burning a Qur'an isn't about burning paper and card: it's about eradicating ideas, which is why Heinrich Heine was once moved to comment, "Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings."

Hitler proved with his own book-burning shenanigans; once you have destroyed one vessel of an idea, you soon move on to destroy another.

Ideas don't die with books, they die with people; so if it's an idea you want to kill, eventually you'll have to commit murder.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not suggesting the Pastor is definitely about to embark on a killing spree. I

I'm saying he is treading very dangerous ground; I'm saying that once you deem an idea so threatening that it must be destroyed, suddenly all kinds of behaviour become acceptable.

As one sage commenter put it, "the Pastor will have blood on his hands if he proceeds with this madness." Indeed.

"I have more chance of being decapitated by a Frisbee [than becoming Prime Minister."

Labour were the party with most to be happy about after the 13 Norwich by-elections (or delayed elections) that took place yesterday.

The Lib Dems lost one of their two seats to Labour, with the Conservatives losing both of theirs. The Greens, who had hoped for a breakthrough, held five seats but failed to make any gains.

The Lib Dems held Eaton ward with an increased share of the vote.

Compared to the last time the seats were fought in 2008:

Labour finished up three on seven seats
The Greens won five seats, the same as in 2008
The Lib Dems were down one on one seat
The Conservatives didn't win any seats, compared to two in 2008

If my sums are right, that means the new makeup of Norwich City Council is:

Labour: 16
Green: 14
Lib Dem: 5
Conservative: 4

A new medical study has said that the NHS could save millions of pounds a year by offering more weight-loss surgery for obese patients.

About one million people in England meet recommended criteria for so-called bariatric surgery, but only 3,600 NHS weight-loss operations were carried out last year.

Obesity and related medical conditions directly cost the NHS £4.3 billion a year, while the impact on the wider economy runs into millions.

The Office of Health Economics estimates that £1.3 billion would be saved within three years, if a quarter of those eligible underwent surgery.

Savings of between £35 million and £150 million could also be made in welfare payments as people return to work, according to the study, titled "Shedding The Pounds".

John Black, president of the Royal College of Surgeons, which commissioned the report along with the National Obesity Forum, described the figures as "simply staggering".

"The NHS cannot afford to ignore the mounting evidence that shows that bariatric surgery, for those patients where all other treatments have failed, is not only proven to be successful but also hugely cost effective," he said.

The report was funded by health firms Allergan and Covidien, which make medical equipment used in weight-loss surgery.

Almost a quarter of adults in England were obese in 2008 - a figure expected to double by 2050.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) says people with a body mass index (BMI) of more than 40 - or between 35 and 40 if they also have a condition such as diabetes or high blood pressure - are eligible for surgery.

Liberal Democrat Health Minister Paul Burstow said:

"Our ambition is to encourage healthier lifestyles and reduce the need for this type of treatment."

"As part of the Change4Life movement, we are encouraging people to make simple changes, such as eating more fruit and veg, cutting down on fatty foods and being more active.

"Our public health white paper later this year will set out plans to help people lead healthier lifestyles in more detail.

"Whether to prescribe drugs or recommend surgery is rightly a clinical decision. Independent guidance on obesity from Nice recommends that drugs and surgery should always be a last resort - a better diet and more exercise should be tried first.

"It is up to individual trusts to commission a range of services to meet their local community's needs."

On September 16 the Public Health department, while working with partner organisations, have organised an 'Intergenerational Day' at the Thrunscoe centre, Cleethorpes.

On September 16 the Public Health department, while working with partner organisations, have organised an 'Intergenerational Day' at the Thrunscoe centre, Cleethorpes.

The event will promote the ways that people can volunteer to work with other members of their community. In particular, the team hope to inspire people of different ages to share ideas, learn from and support each other.

There are a number of ways that people of different ages can volunteer to help. Some examples of the activities available include; supporting growing clubs and cookery groups, visiting schools to read to children or helping out on school trips.

Volunteering for such projects can help people to gain valuable experience. They also provide a fantastic way to be social and improve your physical and mental health.

By working together different generations can have a positive impact on their communities. Intergenerational working builds stronger, more inclusive communities and such projects help to regenerate older neighbourhoods.

On the day the Specialist Health Promotion Service will be on hand to offer support and advice. They have put together a 'Intergenerational Practice Booklet' that can be picked up for free and offers guidance on setting up projects in your own community.

Councillor Hocknell, the portfolio holder for healthier communities and adult social care, said:
"It's such a simple idea, but it can make such a huge difference. There's a lot to be learnt from those younger and older than us. Volunteering for projects like this, provide a great way to learn while making a real difference to the places you live."

The government has announced three ideas submitted to the Treasury's Spending Challenge crowd-sourcing initiative will be implemented as policy.

read more

Despite its implementation in April, a survey from document management software company Version One has revealed 22% of the country’s IT professionals aren’t aware of the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme.

read more

"The SNP is scaremongering as usual. The Hooper review makes it clear that Royal Mail is in dire straits and we need to sort it out. If we sat back and did nothing, as the SNP would clearly prefer, the vital services Royal Mail provide would disintegrate."  

Commenting on the SNP attack on Business Secretary Vince Cable over the future of the Royal Mail, Liberal Democrat MP Malcolm Bruce said: "The SNP is scaremongering as usual. The Hooper review makes it clear that Royal Mail is in dire straits and we need to sort it out. 

"If we sat back and did nothing, as the SNP would clearly prefer, the vital services Royal Mail provide would disintegrate.

"Our plans offer employees shares in their own company, a stake in the future of Royal Mail, which is a long-held Liberal Democrat policy.

"The SNP is deliberately mixing up steps to rescue Royal Mail with the future of Post Offices. This is unbelievably irresponsible.

"Vince Cable is taking the necessary steps to secure our mail services for the future. There is no programme of closures planned, as under the Labour Government, because we recognise the value of our Post Offices, particularly those in rural and remote areas."

"It contains arguments over numbers, differences of opinion on relevance and political standpoints, and frequent moments when someone erases the whole thing and just writes 'Saddam Hussein was a dickhead.'

"This is historiography. This is what culture actually looks like: a process of argument, of dissenting and accreting opinion, of gradual and not always correct codification."

In 2009/10, we were lucky that, here in Winchester, we had a Mayor who cared passionately about homelessness and raised a large amount to support local homelessness charities.

This is the film that was made to support Dominic's campaign.


[See post to watch Flash video]
To support homeless people in Winchester, you can donate online to Trinity or to the Nightshelter – and both organisations are also always looking for volunteers. Two other organisations are also actively helping homeless people locally: Emmaus and the Winchester branch of the Salvation Army.

If you were watching the first of Daybreak on ITV on Monday, then there's a chance your TV was being powered by wind, or more correctly ‘electricity generated by wind turbines connected to the GB power transmission system' - wind - because at 8.30pm on Monday, September 6, the record for wind powered leccy entering the National Grid was set. We were pretty blown away.

According to the National Grid, the record of 1860MW of electricity was being generated from wind turbines - largely from Scotland - accounting for 4.7 per cent of total generation at the time.

And over the 24 hours for the day between midnight and midnight, wind generated 5 per cent of all electricity - 40.5GWh out of a total 809.5GWh.

Independent windy millers West Coast Power, based in Wales but bothering to get in touch, were chuffed.

Development manager Richard Fearnall said: "This is encouraging news - it puts to bed the myth that wind power is not a vital part of the mix in achieving energy security and meeting our renewable targets.

"Let's hope that the landowners, potential neighbours of new schemes and, in particular, local planning authorities are the ones who are most encouraged by the news and that they will actively help the UK towards our legally-binding 2020 target of generating 15 per cent of our energy from renewable resources, much of which will be wind generated.

"We foresee that wind energy will be increasingly generated from small and medium sized installations after the extra support for this scale of project was introduced through the Feed-in tariff."

The PRSD is part of News and Media Republic, a not-for-profit independent media company. We believe communication helps build confident communities. We don't believe in paywalls or barriers to information, and we rely on advertising and donations. To help us keep doing what we're doing

The Dissenter takes an interesting tack of his own, inspired (if that is the right word) by the News Letter's Unionism 2010 series. And in the process he says things that should be of interest to all constitutional camps in Northern Ireland:

...the business sector is as much grounded in a dependency culture as the social sector. Nationalists cannot complain about a significant reduction in Northern Ireland's public sector. If there is to be an all-Islands economy (one of the largest in the world of which we are already an integrated part) then the public sector engagement in the economy has to be reduced to the UK level (even at its current high of 50%) . Perhaps we should aim to be close to Irish Republic's smaller public sector, otherwise a reduction in corporation tax is pointless and should not even be under consideration.

Those who are creating wealth in society must be encouraged at the expense of those who profit from public subsidy. Far from NI Water returning to the Department of Regional Development it must be prepared for the private sector.

It is not necessary for Unionist parties to unite structurally to agree common points on a future for good government.  The Unionist electorate is not a single monolithic body. It does not lack choice in Party, rather in leadership and ideas on moving forward. No matter the number of parties, Unionism is currently failed by a lack of strategic and purposeful leadership.  There would be a collective electorate groan at the thought of the present Unionist leaderships entering more talks on the future of Northern Ireland given their abject failure to date.

What is required to 2021 and beyond is coherent vision and a policy driven agenda that sets out what is necessary for a small, open, free and intelligence-led economy making a positive social, cultural and political contribution within the UK. This, far far more than (and probably in spite of) political manoeuvering or structural machinations, will build and strengthen the Union.

Extract from Greg McLaughlin and Stephen Baker: The Propaganda of Peace: The Role of Media and Culture in the Northern Ireland Peace Process. Bristol: Intellect Books. 2010.

Political opponents Ian Paisley and Martin McGuiness were confirmed as First Minister and Deputy First Minister of a new executive in May 2007, closing yet another chapter in Northern Ireland's troubled history. A dramatic realignment of politics had brought these irreconcilable enemies together and the media played a significant role in persuading the public to accept this startling change.

The Propaganda of Peace places their role in a broad cultural context and examines a range of factual and fictional representations, from journalism and public museum exhibitions to film, television drama and situation comedy. The authors propose a distinctive theoretical and methodological approach to analyzing the role of such representations in communicating what they call 'the propaganda of peace'. They go on to explore whether it simply promotes conflict transformation or if it actually underwrites the abandonment of a politically engaged public sphere at the very moment when debates about neo-liberalism, financial meltdown and social and economic inequality make it most necessary?

The propaganda of peace, as defined and identified in this book, has been reproduced in different media and cultural forms, supported and sponsored by various political, social and cultural agencies. Nevertheless, it has demonstrated a remarkable unity, narrowing the terms of political debate and shrinking the cultural imagination to promote two complimentary narratives about Northern Ireland's bright new future. The first, most explicit and immediate narrative was about the need for an end to violence and the achievement of a political settlement between Catholic and Protestant, nationalist and unionist. The second, implicit and far-reaching narrative was about making Northern Ireland fit for integration into the global capitalist system or, as Tony Blair preferred to call it, the 'civilised world'.

Seen in these terms, Northern Ireland is not only undergoing a peace process aimed at settling its constitutional position. It is potentially undergoing a process of pacification, a denial of politics upon which the free market depends. The construction of a peace process 'consensus' has somehow pre-empted the need or desire to question, re-imagine or propose alternatives at a critical moment in history.

Indeed, in his book, Globalisation, Democracy and Terrorism, Eric Hobsbawn considers the prospects for war and peace in the 21st century, pointing out that 'the more rapidly growing inequalities created by uncontrolled free-market globalisation are natural incubators of grievance and instability'. He was writing at a time when the neo-liberal project still seemed unassailable but the credit crunch and the financial meltdown of September 2008 have thrown it into a crisis of legitimacy, giving rise to what Antonio Gramsci called 'a great variety of morbid symptoms'. In the specific context of Northern Ireland, such symptoms include increasing sectarian conflict, social exclusion and poverty.  Journalist, David McKittrick, has reported that a total of 1500 sectarian attacks - an average of four a day - took place in there the space of one year (2007/08). Meanwhile, the number of families evacuated from their homes because of intimidation had also risen in that period. (Independent, 14 September, 2008). Yet these realities were rarely acknowledged in the media and cultural representations we looked at in this book. Instead, the overwhelming emphasis of the propaganda of peace has been a discourse of 'no alternative' – effectively a denial of politics in preference for domesticated consumerism – just at a time when what is really needed, post devolution, is politically engaged public discourse and active citizenship.

The Propaganda of Peace went to press before the recent upsurge of activity in the north by the Real IRA. Yet the public reaction to their shootings and car bombs in some ways underlines one of the key arguments of the book. It is as if the peace process has marked for Northern Ireland a cultural year zero, in which the history and politics of the conflict it apparently resolved has been sucked out of public memory, replaced instead with incomprehension and an inability to look at republican or loyalist dissidence, or indeed any other social, economic or political problem, as a sign that the framework of the political settlement is somewhat shaky, the foundations unsound.

The key themes of the book also resonate internationally.  For example, we show how the British state played a key role in helping transform the image of republicans from pariahs to peacemakers, reversing decades of anti-terrorist propaganda in order to justify face-to-face negotiations with them. It may have to do likewise if it is to negotiate with the Taliban in Afghanistan, an eventuality the state is at last coming to terms with. President Obama's attempt to revive the peace process in the Middle East, between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and Spain's response to the ETA's recently announced ceasefire, will also dictate a radical shift in official positions if they are to bear any palatable fruit. Such contingencies demand that in each case the state provides cues and leads to the mainstream media, helping to transform the atmosphere and create the right mood music.

However, the lesson of the 'propaganda of peace' is that the role of the state and the media in conflict transformation is about more than just contingency. Ideally, in a post conflict society, they need to broaden their conception of peace as more than the mere absence of conflict. They need to play a part in accommodating competing visions of a new and inclusive civil society rather than just settle for a one-dimensional political system and integration into a global economy that has since been so fatally compromised and discredited.

Greg McLaughlin and Stephen Baker are lecturers in media studies at the University of Ulster and fellows of the University's Centre for Media Research.

Unite leader to consult staff across British Airways about co-ordinated response

The Unite trade union has threatened to escalate the cabin crew dispute at British Airways to a company-wide confrontation by consulting 30,000 BA staff over a "co-ordinated response" to allegations of union-busting.

Tony Woodley, joint general secretary of Unite, said he was calling a meeting of shop stewards across the airline to warn staff that BA was determined to reduce Unite's power within the carrier. BA has consistently denied accusations, voiced by Unite and academics, that it is attempting to break trade unionism at a business where Unite has considerable influence by representing around three-quarters of BA's 40,000 staff.

Woodley said the sacking of 13 cabin crew and suspension of more than 60 flight attendants since an industrial row broke out last year indicated a further agenda at the airline.

"I am therefore calling an early meeting of representatives of all Unite BA members to set out the facts of what is happening in the company, in particular what I believe, in the absence of any serious proposals from the company to settle the dispute, is a plan to eliminate Unite from a sizeable part of the company and weakening the position of the union in the remainder, and to discuss the need for a co-ordinated and concerted union response."

Willie Walsh, BA chief executive and a former shop steward at Ireland's Aer Lingus, has rejected Unite's claims as "nonsense".

British Airways and Unite have held a series of meetings this year in a bid to end a dispute that has seen 22 days of walkouts so far. One meeting at the Acas conciliation service was abandoned after it was invaded by members of the Socialist Workers party. The main barrier to a peace agreement, Unite claims, is BA's refusal to fully reinstate staff travel perks that were stripped from the estimated 6,700 cabin crew who took part in industrial action over changes to their working practices.

The consultations with all BA Unite members are not guaranteed to trigger an airline-wide ballot for industrial action, which would take more time to organise than a cabin crew ballot.

Vice-chairman of body representing police officers in England and Wales says 25% cuts will 'devastate' police service

Ask every local authority in England to publish all its spending over £500 in an open format and what do you get? A whole load of PDFs. See our list of the best and the worst
o Get the data

It's an open data revolution. Every one of the 152 local authorities in England has to publish every item of spending over £500 by the end of this year.

The Liberal-Conservative coalition government has been pretty explicit about what it expects. First the prime minister David Cameron wrote a letter to government departments in which he told them he expected to see government to:

ensure that any data published is made available in an open format so that it can be re-used by third parties

In case there's any doubt, that means excel or CSV files. Then Eric Pickles told all local authorities in England (he has no authority over Scotland and Wales) that

"I don't expect everyone to get it right first time, but I do expect everyone to do it"

Councils have until January to comply but in the meantime, a number have already started to release their data. But it's not quite working out.

It should be a fantastic journalistic resource. In theory, councils will publish their data so that we can compare how they spend their money and pick up on the good and bad in public spending.

We wanted to start listing all the councils that have complied so far - and give you the links so you could check for yourself.

And what it shows is a disturbing lack of awareness among councils as to what they're doing. Of the 53 councils (a third of the total) in England who have published so far:

o 39% have published their spending in PDF format only, including East Herts, Broxtowe, Fareham, Hammersmith & Fulham, Hillingdon and Islington
o Some are available in monthly, some are annual and some are quarterly - making it difficult to compare different councils. One, East Herts, publishes them weekly
o 68% of them are Conservative councils
o 27% of them are from London and the South East
o A number of councils have published their data using Spotlight on Spend, a service from Spikes Cavell which was controversial earlier this year because of a perceived lack of openness

The PDF issue is the biggest problem. While PDFs are fine for displaying documents, they are the worst possible format for any kind of analysis - publishing on PDF allows you to appear open without actually being open.

The Department for Communities and Local Government plans to publish full guidelines which will tell councils how to do this in the next few days. "The deadline is not until January," says a spokesman adding that open data formats will be expected. "We want this to be the case for all data."

In the meantime, we will monitor councils right here, adding more as they publish. If you know of any, please let us know in the comment field below. The spreadsheet is attached too, so let us know if you perform any analysis.

o DATA: download the full spreadsheet

o Search the world's government with our gateway

Flickr Please post your visualisations and mash-ups on our Flickr group or mail us at datastore@guardian.co.uk

o Get the A-Z of data
o More at the Datastore directory
o Follow us on Twitter

Move by business secretary Vince Cable to introduce legislation to start the process raises fears the Royal Mail's universal service obligation could be at risk

The government is to start the process of privatising or selling Royal Mail, raising fears that its universal service obligation could be at risk.

Business secretary Vince Cable announced this morning that new legislation will be introduced in the autumn that would inject private investment into the service. This follows the publication of a new report which warned that "urgent action" needed to be taken to protect the Royal Mail from collapse.

Under the government's plans, a slice of the group would also be handed to its workers. Cable confirmed the move after Richard Hooper, former deputy chairman of Ofcom, warned that Royal Mail's financial position has deteriorated since 2008.

Cable said that Royal Mail faced a combination of "potentially lethal challenges", including declining mail volumes and low investment. He added that the Mail was still too inefficient, and was hampered by a "dire pension position", with a deficit estimated at £8bn back in March.

"We are determined to safeguard Royal Mail for the future and help it tackle these challenges," said Cable.

Unions, though, reacted with anger to the plans. Billy Hayes, general secretary of the Communications Workers Union, claimed privatisation would harm customers in rural areas and could even end the universal service obligation - Royal Mail's longstanding promise that letters be delivered daily to virtually any address in the country.

"Privatisation would be devastating for Royal Mail and the whole country's postal services. The universal service has been a key part of the UK post for 170 years but because it isn't the profitable element of mail, the privatisation will put it at risk," Hayes claimed.

Hooper had been asked to assess the situation at the Royal Mail again after producing a report in 2008 that recommended privatisation. His new conclusions, published this morning, paint a grim picture. Hooper said that the decline in the number of letters being sent is greater than forecast in the 2008 report, with worldwide falls in the next five years of up to 40% predicted. Although parcel deliveries will continue to increase as more people shop online, this is not expected to cover the decline on the letters side. Hooper also argued that the pension deficit, at £8bn, was "even more unsustainable" than before.

Hooper said that private sector capital must be introduced into Royal Mail either through a sale to a partner or trade investor, or by a flotation on the stock market. He also recommended that the pension deficit should be taken over by the government.

The previous Labour government had shelved its own plans for partial privatisation of the Post Office in June 2009, following opposition from its own MPs. Lord Mandelson had hoped to sell a 30% stake in the business.

It is not clear how much of the Royal Mail would be sold off under the coalition government's plan. According to one report, as much as 20% could be handed to its employees.

It is known that the Post Office network will be retained in public ownership, due to "its hugely important social and economic role in communities throughout the UK".

The CWU, though, remains opposed to privatisation of the Royal Mail. "We've put in place a detailed and fully funded modernisation programme which is dramatically transforming Royal Mail," said Dave Ward, the union's deputy general secretary. "Why does the government want to threaten the stability and capital of this programme when it's proving a major success?

"We fear the pensions of our members will be at risk under privatisation. Everyone hears about the deficit, but there's over £26bn in assets which belongs to the postmen and women who have paid their contributions every week of their working lives."

The UK is reputedly poor at capitalising on its scientific excellence. Is this due to a lack of vision in the advice given to politicians?

Crises provide opportunities, as every good manager knows.

From my point of view as a particle physicist there is a very dangerous kind of opportunist lurking in and around Whitehall. You don't have to be a genius to realise that if swingeing cuts are made in the science budget, huge damage will be inflicted on the scientific standing and economic future of the UK. But some influential people in the science policy arena see this as an opportunity to remove an annoying anomaly - the UK's leadership in particle physics. In particular they seem to loathe CERN, the world-leading laboratory of which the UK is a founder member.

I'm sorry if this sounds paranoid, but the evidence is they are out to get me.

I don't think this threat comes from politicians and I don't detect a massive change here between Labour and the coalition. David Willetts is on record praising CERN (and Margaret Thatcher's decision to stay in it), and in his speech on Wednesday Dr Vince Cable also highlighted CERN's contribution.

But there is something badly wrong when Sir David King, president of the British Science Association and a former government chief scientific advisor, chooses the day the Large Hadron Collider puts exciting science in the news with a positive story to accuse us of "navel gazing". Or when Lord Browne, President of the Royal Academy of Engineering, is asked about priorities and immediately tells the government to cut science, especially maths and physics, and most especially particle physics and CERN. (Even if the authority with which he speaks may be dubious.) And then, seizing the "opportunity" of Cable's speech, the Chemical Engineers wade in. With even a (very old) picture of the science they want to stop.

If this is what they will say in public, I dread to think what they say in their private chats with ministers or civil servants.

In my darker moments I worry that the actual council of STFC (which funds particle physics) is part of the problem. I desperately hope I am wrong, but I would feel a lot better if Philip Greenish, CEO of the RAEng and a member of STFC council, had distanced himself from the ill-informed attack the RAEng made on STFC science. Or failing that, if Professor Michael Sterling, the chair, hadn't backed him up. Do they agree that particle physics, which is in their custody, should be for the chop?

When Professor Bill Wakeham was commissioned to produce a review
of UK physics in light of the dire state of STFC finances many feared he was another who saw the CERN budget as something which would be better spent fighting climate change or subsidising industry (to take the apparent preferred destinations of Sir David and Lord Browne respectively). However, his report triumphantly vindicated STFC science, concluding that particle physics and astronomy were two areas in physics where the UK was genuinely world leading.

The tragedy is that there is such a lost opportunity here. CERN is a target simply because it is large and visible. This high profile should be a huge strength for the whole breadth of science and engineering.

Why could Sir David King not appear on Newsnight and say "Yes, this is brilliant! Look how exciting science is! And we must harness the excitement and the new knowledge it brings to solve some of the problems facing us!"

Why could the RAEng not say "Particle physics is an adventure where exciting engineering is essential, from software and the invention of the world-wide web, through electronics and the invention of touchscreens, to the challenges of large-scale cryogenics. Be an engineer, be at the scientific and technological cutting edge, and be part of the economic recovery."

Do engineers in general agree with what is being said in their name? Lyn Evans and Steve Myers, past and current leaders of the LHC, are UK engineers, for goodness sake! This is a real, classic example of lack of vision in the UK failing to capitalise on real UK excellence.

The science and engineering budget, as far as anyone can tell, makes a big net return to the economy. The whole thing, from medical research to maths, is comparable to the amount lost in unpaid taxes and wrongly paid benefit. These grandees should be out there arguing the relative priority of (for example) climate research in the context of all government spending, not against CERN.

This has been something of a partisan rant, everyone is nervous about the coming cuts. But I don't think it is special pleading, it is an objection to being specially pleaded against. Particle physicists are not generally more expensive than other scientists, we just have fewer, bigger and more visible projects which seem to make irresistible targets for some.

Yesterday I was depressed to hear Dr Vince Cable accepting that big cuts would happen, and repeating tired lines about economic focus. However, he did also talk about backing excellence, and there is clearly still room for some discussion. Given the unquestioned excellence of UK particle physics, (and many other areas of curiousity-led science) perhaps the opportunists should take care.

Everyone in receipt of taxpayers money should have to justify themselves, especially now. We can and do. Particle physics is an essential part of the scientific culture of the UK, and that culture is critical to our future as a nation, and globally as a species.

I hope at least some of the people who have the ear of the government also have the eyes to see.

As taxpayer groups from Britain and elsewhere meet, activism that questions the scope of government is taking global shape

For three days this week the British organisation, TaxPayers' Alliance, led by Matthew Elliott has hosted dozens of the world's leading taxpayer advocacy groups from most of the nations of Europe as well as China, Korea, Japan, Canada and the US. Hour after hour, taxpayer leaders have mounted the podium and held forth on lessons learned from their nations' battles against overtaxation. What has worked? What has failed? What role for the internet, Facebook, and mass rallies?

There has been a great deal of fascination with the Tea Party movement in the US. Will it become a real political party? Will it topple the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and Senate on election day, 2 November 2010? Why did it start? When will it fizzle out?

As an American living with the creation, growth and power of the Tea Party movement over the past two years I have almost come to take for granted a movement that did not exist before March 2009 - a mere 19 months ago. The Tea Party movement created and announced itself in a series of mass demonstrations in more than 1,000 American cities just before and on 15 April 2009, the day Americans must submit their federal income taxes. Those rallies were repeated on Independence Day, 4 July, and throughout August when congressmen return to their home districts for what are usually small, quiet and boring "town hall meetings" but this time were large, loud and angry mass gatherings of taxpayers. In September of the past two years there were larger rallies of hundreds of thousands of taxpayers in Washington DC.

I have spoken at rallies in Washington, Pittsburgh and North Dakota and have been surprised at the number of newly minted activists who admit they have never attended a rally before in their lives and saw themselves before the explosion of federal spending in 2008 and 2009 as non-political. A Tea Party activist is an American terrified into political action by what they see as an assault on the American economy and ultimately American liberty posed by the massive bailouts, stimulus spending sprees and power grabs by federal bureaucrats over the financial industry, healthcare and the auto industry. Because they see the Democrat party led by Nevada's Senator Harry Reid, San Fransisco Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and President Barack Obama, their political energy is directed to the electoral benefit of the modern Republican party. But that support is not an unquestioning enlistment in the Republican ranks. The first "victims" of Tea Party wrath have been Republican old bulls who have been defeated in Republican primaries by Tea Party-supported (and often Sarah Palin-endorsed) insurgent Republican candidates.

America is used to political movements built up around the interests of unions, gun owners, advocates or opponents of legalised abortion and ethnic minorities. But the Tea Party movement is the first and only movement motivated by and fixated on the central question of the size and scope of government. "It's the spending, stupid" is both a popular bumper sticker and the best summation of what goads Tea Party activists to action.

The Tea Party leadership are new faces. They are still learning how to channel their concerns into political victories. Alexis de Tocqueville would perhaps have argued that this will remain a uniquely American phenomenon. But for three days in London the secrets of the great US tax rebellion are being shared with activists from China and Britain, Korea and Canada - and enough dropped matches just might start something interesting.

Exeter and Norwich council elections represent largest voting test since formation of the coalition in May

Labour today claimed that results in a string of council seats in Exeter and Norwich showed voters were rejecting the coalition's policies on cutting the deficit.

Labour became the largest party on Exeter city council, winning more than half the 13 seats available in last night's by-elections.

The party won two from the Tories and recovered one lost earlier through a defection.

The Tories compensated by winning one seat from the Liberal Democrats and one from the separate Liberal party, but also lost two seats. The Lib Dems, who had controlled the council, lost one of the three seats they were defending.

Councillors in Exeter and Norwich were forced to seek re-election after a court ruling rejecting plans for new all-purpose authorities. The contests represented the largest voting test since the formation of the coalition government in May.

A move by the previous government to grant unitary status, which would have extended until 2011 terms due to expire in May this year, was quashed by the high court in July. One of the Exeter contests was for an additional by-election after a resignation.

Tories, Liberal Democrats and the Green party fought all 13 seats at Exeter and Labour fought 12. Ukip had 10 candidates and the Liberal party and BNP had one each.

The Labour MP for Exeter, Ben Bradshaw, said: "This is a fantastic result for Labour and a fantastic result for Exeter.

"People here have voted for a progressive party dedicated to supporting the recovery, and have rejected the coalition's irresponsible plans that will hit the poorest hardest and risk jobs and economic growth in Exeter."

In Norwich, Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems and Greens contested all 13 seats and Ukip fought five.

In an early blow for Liberal Democrats at the Norwich count, they lost at Thorpe Hamlet to the Green party. This ward is in the Norwich South constituency where Lib Dems ousted Labour's former home secretary Charles Clarke in May's general election.

But despite its one gain from Lib Dems, the Greens failed in their bid to become the largest party in a town hall for the first time, a disappointing result ahead of the first day of their party conference.

They had hoped to gain from Lib Dem voters disillusioned with their party's decision to join the Conservatives in a coalition.

A Press Association analysis of votes cast in wards covering 94% of Norwich South had put the Green party narrowly ahead of Labour with Lib Dems trailing in third place.

Cllr Steve Morphew, Labour leader of Norwich city council, said: "It is clear that the people of Norwich have lost faith in the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives. The coalition can take no comfort from these results.

"Our gain in Norwich shows it is Labour that local voters trust to stand up for them. We will continue to listen to their concerns and continue to work for the people of Norwich."

One of the more unpleasant aspects of the New Labour government was its anti-Hayekian pretence that central government could acquire knowledge which, in fact, is unobtainable. The coalition has inherited this boneheaded idea.

Take Vince Cable's recent speech:

There is no justification for taxpayers money being used to support research which is neither commercially useful nor theoretically outstanding.

The problem here is that it is impossible to predict what research will be commercially useful.

History is full of examples of businessmen and scientists – let alone politicians – utterly failing to anticipate commercial uses, for example:

"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable"
"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value."
"Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax."
"While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially it is an impossibility."
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us."

The notion that government can cut only "useless" science funding is an egregious pretence to know things that cannot be known. Instead, such cuts operate much as financial constraints for business operate: they diminish the ecology upon which natural selection operates.

The only reason I hesitate to call Cable a witless imbecile is that I doubt that he actually believes what he says.

Speaking of witless imbeciles brings me seamlessly to Gideon Osborne. He says:

People who are disabled, people who are vulnerable, people who need protection will get our protection, and more.

"But people who think it's a lifestyle choice to just sit on out-of-work benefits – that lifestyle choice is going to come to an end.

Now, leave aside the hypocrisy of the heir to a multi-million fortune whining about folk getting something for nothing.

Leave aside the fact that there's little point encouraging people to find work if there's none to be had. And leave aside the fact that the unemployed are, on average, significantly unhappier than those in work.

Even if we ignore all this, there's still a problem here. It is, practically speaking, almost impossible for the state to distinguish between the "vulnerable" and the "workshy". A more intrusive benefits system will bear heavily upon those with poor mental health, low IQ and poor social skills, whilst "scroungers" will continue to game the system. 

The distinction between deserving and undeserving poor might seem clear to bar-room bigots. But it is almost impossible to apply it to millions of individual people, except by creating a bureaucracy so large as to offset any savings on benefits.

Osborne is doing just what Cable and New Labour did. He's assuming the state can know things which in fact it cannot.

Good Hayekians should be sceptical of what Osborne and Cable are claiming. Sadly, though, I suspect that  the majority of people who claim to admire Hayek are wedded more to class war than to Hayek's actual ideas.

London's Mayor Boris Johnson today announced that he would stand again as the Conservative candidate in 2012.

He will be endorsed officially by the Conservatives next month.

With a well-timed leak to ConservativeHome today, Boris' team let it be known that internal polling shows he has a 55% approval rating.

Paul Waugh at the Evening Standard however publishes a graph that shows Boris Johnson's net approval at around 40%.

But it's not clear where those figures are from.

The GLA does do an annual survey of London opinion. This is published in the public domain and shows things aren't as rosy for the Mayor as ConservativeHome would like to believe.

The last survey (via Adam Bienkov) shows that satisfaction with Boris Johnson's record was actually only 26%.

And this is perhaps more worrying for Boris.

In other words – not all is well in Boris world despite what you read on ConservativeHome.

Dumped and fly tipped rubbish litters the ground beneath electricity pylons passing the Ffos-Y-Fran opencast coal mine on November 17, 2009 in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales. Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Fly-tipping has declined in England in the past year, according to new government figures (pdf) which suggest that tougher action by local authorities against perpetrators is paying off. The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has revealed that the number of incidents of illegally dumped waste in England fell by nearly one-fifth (18.7%) to 947,000, following a 9% decrease the previous year. In total, there were 2,460 prosecution actions carried out in 2009-10, of which 97% achieved a successful outcome such as a fine.

The figures are the latest from Flycapture - the national database of fly-tipping incidents and enforcement action which was set up by Defra, the Environment Agency and the Local Government Association to record the volume of incidents and cost of illegally dumped waste dealt with by local authorities. Environment minister Lord Henley said: "We're encouraged by the efforts being made by local authorities to tackle fly-tipping but there is no room for complacency. A total of nearly 947,000 incidents is unacceptable by any standards and fly-tipping is clearly still a significant problem. We must all work together to stamp out this continuing blight on our neighbourhoods."

Of the other findings, nearly half (49%) of all fly-tips cleared by local authorities took place on public roads and highways - a 21% reduction on the previous year. And one-third (33%) occurred on council land and footpaths and bridleways - a 20% reduction on the previous year.

Individuals appear to be responsible for much of the illegal tipping, with 58% of all rubbish cleared recorded as being the size of a car boot-load or a small van. And 63% of fly-tips dealt with by local authorities involved household waste including food. The estimated cost of clearance of illegally dumped waste reported by local authorities in this period was £45.8m - a reduction of £9.2m compared to 2008-09.

More: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/10/fly-tipping-england

• The overall number of households containing at least one person aged 16 to 64 with no one in work in April to June 2010 was 3.9 million, up 148,000 households from a year earlier. Of these households, over three-quarters, or 3.0 million, were workless because all individuals within them were inactive, which means they were either not looking for work or were notavailable for it.
• Of the 11.5 million children aged 0 to 15 in households, 1.9 million (16.1 per cent) live in workless households, with most of these in lone parent households. For lone parent households with dependent children, 39.7 per cent are workless compared with 5.4 per cent of couple households with dependent children.
• The number and percentage of children in workless households has fallen from a year earlier, as nearly all of the increase in workless households has been in one-person households, up 162,000, to 1.5 million.
• The number of people aged 16 to 64 living in workless households was 5.4 million, up 26,000 from a year earlier, representing 13.5 per cent of all people aged 16 to 64.