The current, seemingly unending, outcry over over MPs expenses claims in the UK has galvanized the public into a state of revulsion over the way that tax payers money has been abused. Some are clearly oversights, but others would appear to be downright fraudulent. In the meantime the political parties seem to trying to outdo each other in trying to appear humble, show regret and make great shows of repaying money. Unfortunately this scandal has only re-enforced our views of politicians, in that we see them as self-serving, power hungry and quite happy to screw the taxpayer for every penny possible. This is, of course, not entirely true; most MPs enter politics for entirely worthy reasons. Many will say they were only following the rules, although there is always a difference between the letter and the spirit of a rule. They are not helped by some politicians saying that they were blissfully unaware that they were claiming for expenses that had not incurred, such as claiming for a mortgage that had in fact already completed its term for example.

All this has clearly been going on for years and has led to a particular culture of claiming for expenses within the House of Commons. One question we should perhaps ask is why had no-one noticed before?

We do need to be careful with all this though. Most MPs do need a second home in London in order for them to carry out their duties. I would argue that these MPs should be able to make some sort of reasonable claim for this. If they are not able to claim then this rules out all but the very wealthy from entering politics. Is this what we really want? One radical suggestion that has been put forward is that MPs’ second home should be some sort of halls of residence, therefore at one stroke eliminating all issues of claiming for mortgages and various extravagances. I cannot see this idea being particularly welcomed by MPs, but clearly they need to win back our trust.

Another danger is that the current mistrust and disillusionment with the mainstream political parties will allow minority parties to fill the vacuum. One such party looking to step into this vacuum is the British National Party who have been putting themselves forward as a party untainted by the excesses of Westminster. They like to miss out the fact that they are racist bigots from their publicity material. Within the current climate there is a real danger that they will make significant gains in the forthcoming European and local elections.

So, I say to our MPs whose job it is to represent our interests - now is the time to win back our trust.

I am a firm believer in a person’s right to peaceful protest. Within any democratic nation protest is one way in which ordinary people can make their feelings know to those in power and at times has proven highly effective affecting government policy - The Boston “Tea Party”, The Jarrow March and the “Poll Tax” protest to name but three. Watching the recent protests that took place in London in relation to the G20 summit I just had to wonder what they were actually protesting about. It has become customary whenever world leaders gather that there should be a protest of some sort, usually degenerating into violence and damage to property. There has been some vague theme about globalization, but….well, what exactly.

If the protesters cannot get their point across to the rest of us, then it rather loses it purpose. I think it becomes even more confused when you have a larger number of leaders present as there are whole range of issues to protest about, but to bring it together into one coherent campaign is rather more challenging. So what we are left with is images of protesters and police clashing, and absolutely no idea what the protest is about.

So here is my message to the protesters - if youactually want to achieve change, then you first need to decide what you are protesting about and put together a coherent campaign that can be communicated to the rest of us. Oh, and you might want to move away from the violent clashes with the police and damage to property. This is rather a distraction!

Whilst politicians and economists from around the world are failing to come to an agreement over how to bring an end to our current economic malaise, perhaps what we need to do is look to examples of the past. A parallel might be the 1930s where after a period of relative prosperity, stock markets crashed and the economies of the world hit recession (and ultimately depression).

What was needed at this time was a cause to bring people together and create a common purpose. And, perhaps more importantly, a distraction from the economics of the time. The course that Nazi Germany took was one of celebrating a new German identity, expanding the German empire and imprisoning and murdering vast numbers of people who were considered by those in power not to conform to the German ideal, i.e. Jews, Gypsies, etc. It is probably not a good idea at this point to consider whether this was good for the German economy, that would just be too abhorrent to think about. But it is true that when times are hard and unemployment increases, prejudice and discrimination against minorities, particular immigrant communities, tends to increase. It is as if we need someone to blame - although at the moment we seem to quite happy to blame bankers.

Of course, at the end of the 1930s the world erupted into global warfare. From an economic point of view this served to unite people of the countries involved against a common enemy and stimulated manufacturing industry. Young men were conscripted into the army and women were brought into the workforce, so unemployment rates dropped considerably.

So that’s the answer then, all we need is major global warfare to solve this recession. There is the small matter of all that death and destruction to consider though - maybe some other solution is required?

The recent killings of two soldiers and a police officer in Northern Ireland may initially cause concern that the region is about to lurch back to what is rather euphemistically referred to as “The Troubles”. However, the unity shown by the politicians of all sides in condemning the killing and the strong reaction of revulsion amongst the local population suggest othewise. The fact that the killings were undertaken by two separate dissident Republican groups suggest that there is a lack of co-ordinated will to return to the old ways. Despite a certain amount of goading by the media, Sinn Fein have roundly condemned the killings and have expressed sympathy for the families involved. It perhaps doubtful that the public response in the form of protest marches will do anything to prick the conscience of those who have perpetrated the killings and most likely are planning to kill again.

The debate then is how to respond to this. The response needs to be a measured one. Times have changed in that Police Service for Northern Ireland has, in general, the support of the public and of all political parties. The service is far more representative of the local population, whereas the Royal Ulster Constabulary was seen by much of the Catholic population as a Protestant body. This position needs to be preserved. In addition, we do not want to return to a position where British soldiers are patrolling the streets of Northern Ireland - this would be very much a retrograde step and would fall into the hands of the terrorists. Somehow a balance must be struck which recognises the increased risk, but at the same time maintains the trust and support of all sections of the community.

It is incidents like this that make me wonder how the government of Northern Ireland, based on the collaborative model that it is, functions on a day to day basis. With the long history of violence between the two communities it is difficult to imagine Sinn Fein and the DUP working effectively together, but it seems that somehow they do. I still marvel at the fact that Peter Robinson of the DUP is First Minister and Martin McGuiness of Sinn Fein is his Deputy. But, I often ask myself, do call each other by their first names, share anecdotes about their families and tell jokes over doughnuts at the Stormont canteen? Who knows…….

When Gordan Gekko (played by Michael Douglas) in the 1987 film, Wall Street, pronounced that “Greed is good” and that “greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of evolutionary spirit” he somehow encapsulated what was felt to be the mood of business at that time. There were many who aspired to work in the financial sector, make vast sums of money on the stock markets, wear designer suits, shout a lot in Wall Street or the City of London, and clutch huge brick sized mobile phones at all times. Clambering over your colleagues to get to where you want to be was seen to be entirely acceptable and the emphasis was on self.

Somehow, as we reach the end of the noughties, the mood is somewhat different. In the U.S., executives of car manufacturers are reprimanded by senators for keeping their private jets when asking for government support, while here in the U.K. there is widespread revulsion at the bonuses being paid for senior banking staff as reward for failure. At the recent select committee hearing where bank executives were giving evidence on what the banks have played in bring the economy to breaking point, strangely “sorry” seemed to a be a very hard word to say. Bankers are now widely mistrusted and have perhaps fallen below estate agents as the most reviled profession.

Meanwhile, there seems to be a renewed interest in many parts of the world in living a simple, more frugal life. And Consumers have suddenly become more interested in the ethical behaviour of big companies, and particularly the behaviour of the executive staff.

So, now let us all chant the new mantra for our times - “Greed is bad”!

OK, so I know this is well and truly “off topic”, but I have just joined a blog rss directory called RSS Hugger . You have the option of paying $20 for inclusion or your blog can be included for free if you write a post about it - so guess which one I chose! (I should say to those nice people at Today.com that this is most definitely not a paid post.) They say that it will give more exposure to my blog and increase traffic, but as this is the first blog that I have registered with RSS Hugger , I have no idea if this is true. No harm in trying though is there. The site has a PR of 4 and a high Alexa ranking so maybe it might bring more visitors to Comments of a Nobody. Let’s see shall we……

However, when we look to some of our near neighbours in central Europe, or indeed across “The Pond” to many of the northern states of the U.S. and to Canada, all of whom are snow bound for several weeks at a time and continue to function, I always wonder why is it that Britain can be brought to a complete standstill.

This spell of snow has brought numerous school closures, public transport paralyzed and transport links barely functioning. Perhaps it is fortunate we only usually get snow for a few days at a time!

I guess this raises a couple of questions. Firstly, why would anyone want to walk through the Swiss mountains, or any mountains for that matter, without the benefit of clothes? What do people gain from it? They obviously gain something from it otherwise they would not do it. Maybe it is something to do with being at one with nature. I can’t help thinking though, I wonder if there many midges or other biting insects in Switzerland?!

The other side of this is what is so offensive about wandering around naked anyway? The Swiss authorities make a point of the fact that many children visit the area as if children are likely to be harmed in some way by seeing naked people rambling through the Swiss countryside. Attitudes to rambling naked can be encapsulated by the attempts of Steve Gough in 2005 to walk the length of Great Britain from Land’s End to John o’ Groats. Along his journey he received reactions of shock and disgust from a few, but messages of support from many more. His most difficult time was in Scotland where he was ultimately arrested and imprisoned for his actions.

What do you think?Is this a legitimate pastime? Or should people be compelled to wear clothes in public?

With the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza international agencies, including the UN have finally been allowed access. Various agencies and media organizations have described the systematic destruction of Gazan homes, businesses and infrastructure that they have found. Ordinary Palestinians have told stories of how innocent people, including children, were killed or seriously injured by Israeli action. There is also evidence that the Israeli army made use of white phosphorus which, while not specifically banned in international law, is widely condemned due to the high probably of civilian casualties, especially in such a crowded area as Gaza.

It is ironic then, that Israel’s attempts to snuff out Hamas may well only serve to strengthen their support. As there is no prospect of any private economic activity in the short-term, the citizens of Gaza will be largely dependent upon the Hamas’ controlled authorities to meet their basic needs. As the Gazan people will seen their homes and business destroyed and in many cases family members and neighbours injured or killed, then resentment against the people of Israel is likely to be higher than ever.

The first response from the international community needs to be of humanitarian aid in order to avoid further deaths and widespread disease. Gaza will need assistance from the outside world in order to rebuild its infrastructure in order for it to be able to function.

Now is the time then for the international community to press for a long-term solution where Israel and Gaza can respect one another’s borders. As Gaza struggles to survive among the rubble this seems like a very long way off. Nevertheless, it is essential in order to avoid further conflict. Perhaps the change in administration at The White House may perhaps assist in this process, particularly as President Obama appears to have a more balanced approach than his predecessor.

Barack Obama has finally been sworn in as the 44th President of the United States amidst a wave of general goodwill and hope. The words “historic” and “momentous” have been used rather a lot over the past 24 hours, but I think it is worth reminding ourselves what this occasion represents. Just 41 years ago, one year after I was born and 7 years after Barack Obama was born, Martin Luther King Jnr was assassinated. He was murdered for daring to advocate for African Americans and pointing out the injustice of segregation, that Black people could not vote and that the police could mete out violence towards Black Americans with apparent impunity.

And now the United States has an African American President!

But let us not be complacent. Whilst this is an enormous step there is still a way to go before true equality can be achieved in the U.S., here in the UK, or indeed anywhere else in the world. Hurricane Katrina in 2005 showed how there are still large numbers of Black Americans who live in poverty and feel ignored and marginalized. The slow response by the authorities seemed to confirm the view of many residents of New Orleans that they did not matter and that had they been middle class White people then the response might have been different. This may or may not be true, but the anger expressed by people stranded and dispossessed was real enough.

So, President Obama, I wish you well! You inherit a Presidency with 2 wars to deal with, an economy in tatters, the hopes of ordinary Americans that you might improve their lot and tackle injustice, and the hope of the rest of the world that you may strive to make world a safer place. Good luck, I think you may need it!