Skip to main content

Day: 5 March 2012

Editor’s Note Issue 15 05/03/12

Written by Nick Renaud-Komiya on . Posted in News.

It’s with great sadness that we report on the attack on Daniel Whiteley. The 1st year English literature student was beaten and is now in hospital with life threatening injuries. We wish him a full and speedy recovery.

If anyone has any information that could be of help to the police, please call 0161 856 424.

Casting your eyes to the bottom of this page you’ll see the list of those who have decided to stand in this year’s student elections. This is just a taster for our election special coming up in next week’s issue. As the election campaign reaches it heady climax, we’ll have all the candidates’ mini manifestos so you can see who deserves your vote.

Voting opens on 9th March and is open until 15th March. No doubt you’ll have had some of those plucky contenders doing shout outs and the start of your lectures. Running for my position as Mancunion Editor last March, I know exactly how they feel. It’s a daunting experience trying to explain to a theatre of 400 people why they should vote for you.

All these people want to make sure that the students’ union is relevant to the needs of Manchester students, so hear them out. Give them a chance and if you like what you hear (or if you don’t) vote on your student portals to make your voice heard.

If you are a resident of Fallowfield, you’ll no doubt have heard of Gaff’s. This week’s business section (page 11) will take you to the heart of the shop’s success in the student heartland.

On the subject of student institutions, it’s MIFTAs time again. This annual student theatre festival puts on a variety of top notch student productions. Turn to page 19 for previews of some of the plays being staged this year.

So read on and we’ll see you next week.

International search for missing Moon rocks

Written by Leah Wong on . Posted in News, Science & Tech.

NASA has recently disclosed that several Moon rocks brought back by the Apollo missions have gone missing. Of the 370 Moon rocks given to the 50 American states and 135 countries, 184 are missing.

Rock was picked up from the Apollo 11 mission in 1969 and the last two astronauts on the Moon, Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt of Apollo 17, picked up a rock and brought it back to Earth in 1972. President Richard Nixon broke up the rocks and distributed them as a gift of good will.

24 rocks are lost, stolen or unaccounted for in the US with 160 missing from around the world. Rocks are missing from Romania, Ireland and Libya.

Now a former NASA agent has made it his mission to find the missing rocks. Known as the “moon rock hunter”, Joseph Gutheinz Jr. ran an undercover sting operation known as Operation Lunar Eclipse with the aim of recovering the missing rocks.

Gutheinz has tried many methods to find the Moon rocks, with the assistance of students from the University of Phoenix and Alvin Community College, Texas. Together they have managed to find 77 of the missing rocks.

In an attempt to lure out black market Moon rock vendors, Gutheinz even placed an advert in USA Today pretending to want to buy rocks. Alan Rosen came forward claiming to have the Honduras Moon rock and wanted to sell it for £3.1m. After a five year investigation, the rock was retrieved by the American government and later returned to Honduras.

One Moon rock given to Ireland is now reportedly at the bottom of a dump. A fire at Dunsink Observatory, Dublin, where the rock was being held led to debris being cleared and disposed of. Among the debris was the Moon rock given to Ireland by the USA. Dr. Ian Elliot, who was at the observatory the night of the fire, believes a search for the Moon rock would be fruitless: “It is a very big dump, I am afraid. It is worse than a needle in a haystack – you would never find it.”

As well as being stolen, Moon rocks can go missing during revolutions, such as the Romanian Moon rock which went missing when the dictator, Nicolae Ceausescu, was executed. It is assumed that it has now been sold into a private collection.

Gutheinz plans to continue searching for the missing Moon rocks but accepts that some which have been sold into private collections may never be found but hopes to find some missing in Europe such as the Romanian one, and the rock given to Malta. The Maltese Moon rock was stolen from the Museum of Natural History.

UMSU: persuade students that they can make a difference

Written by Charles Bailey on . Posted in Opinion.

We were told that the students wanted change. There was a vote. That change starts here. Last week saw the first instalment of the new UMSU assemblies, a replacement for General Meetings which, we were told simply, “didn’t work”. I arrived at the assemblies with high hopes, but left pretty dejected. Though I should probably declare an element of bias – I fought for the ‘No’ campaign during the ‘Monster Referendum’ – I cannot be alone in thinking that the new system offers no improvement whatsoever.

From the moment I learnt that the assemblies would be held in Meeting Room 8 of the Union, I lost faith rapidly – it is a venue which could not possibly hold more than 50 students. If the students were so desperate for this new system, as we are constantly reminded, why are so few expected to turn up? It is a bizarre mentality – and yet, in a damning indictment of our Union, just five students who had not been paid attended. Of 41,000 University of Manchester students, just ten people over two nights were willing to turn up to discuss the various items on the agenda (and when I say ten, I am counting myself twice).

As I argued time and time again during the referendum campaign, the issue is not the structure of the debate, but the way in which the Union communicates with ordinary students. According to members of the executive, the system works better now because paid members of the panel can see first-hand what the Union can do for them. Fantastic! We are spreading the word at £20 a pop.

Is this really what our Union has come to? Students should not need to be paid to get involved in the primary role of the Union, nor to learn what the Union can do. The Union is not just your representation at this University, but on a national and global level. The Union is your voice while you’re at university, offering you the chance to improve your time in Manchester in so many ways. Surely if we all understood the power of the Union we would be in and out of the front door on a daily basis?

On the plus side, some ideas did become policy. Students lucky enough to already know what the Union can do for them submitted motions and now some are our Union’s policies. But that is where the positives end – the motions passed were too vague, and the ones that failed to carry were vetoed due to the impossibility of the ideas. This need not be the case. Our representatives need to ensure that students willing to get involved in the Union know how best to propose their ideas in detail, and are aware of how far the budget of the Union can go.

We are no better off than we were before the ‘Monster Referendum’ passed. It should not require payment to convince students that they have the ability to improve their time at university. Apparently, our Union represents us – do you feel represented?

America’s decisive election

Written by Rob Fuller on . Posted in Opinion.

Elections are said to be won or lost for many reasons. The economy might play a big part. Scandal or incompetence might also put paid to political ambitions. But sometimes elections represent something far greater than the seemingly arbitrary ebb and flow of political fortunes. Some elections come at the precise moment of deep-seated change, on the brink of nationwide transition, where the leaders on either side of the field come to represent opposing sides in the battle for a nation’s soul. New Labour sweeping to victory in 1997 to the sound of ‘Things Can Only Get Better’ is a classic example. For America, Barack Obama and his dual message of ‘Hope’ and ‘Change’ in 2008 represented the start of a new era of mutual co-operation. But four years later it seems the earth is shifting again. Will the 2012 presidential election represent another paradigm shift in the United States?

Obama’s iconic ascension to the presidency in 2008 generated a groundswell of sheer optimism around the world. From the war-weary nation left behind by George W. Bush seemed to emerge a post-racial society where differences could be put aside and co-operation across the political spectrum could solve the USA’s economic and social woes. Within a year, Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize. But today’s America seems more divided than ever. With an increasingly ideologically-driven Republican Party in control of Congress, the business of state has halted. Rather than the promised bipartisan co-operation, the US government has been markedly, brutally split on issues as diverse as the debt crisis, tax cuts for the poor and contraception.

The choice facing American voters this coming November is shaping up to be decisive for their future direction. In the blue corner stands President Obama and his liberal program for government. In the red corner, the wounded beast – a Republican party that is considerably more economically and socially conservative than in 2008, in part because of the influence of the ‘Tea Party’ movement – personified in such colourful characters as Sarah Palin. It’s a profound difference in governing philosophy and its outcome for the US is hard to predict.

But what makes 2012 any different from a normal election? Almost every election pits ideologically divided parties against one another. Why is this election a paradigm shift? There are two answers to this. Firstly, the situation in America is now far more precarious than it was four years ago. The ‘Hope’ agenda of four years ago is now embodied in substantive pieces of public policy, notably the ‘Obamacare’ healthcare reforms, creating clear divisions between both parties. Meanwhile, the country’s grave economic woes are just as prevalent. The budget deficit has become a key election issue dividing the two parties. Republicans have challenged Obama’s use of government spending and now call for huge reductions in the amount of money spent by the government, which has ballooned in recent years. Thus there are now more obvious battle lines than in the last election.

The second answer is the Republicans themselves. It has been a defining feature of the ongoing GOP presidential primaries, and indeed of the years since Obama’s election, that Republicans have become increasingly conservative. Mitt Romney was seen as the conservative choice in the 2008 primary, but is now accused of being too liberal to win his party’s support. Rick Santorum’s rise to national prominence is a direct result of this trend. Santorum has achieved a level of support that four years ago would have been inconceivable, largely on the back of his extremely conservative views on issues such as abortion and gay rights. But while these views appeal to certain sections of the Republican Party, they are anathema to much of the wider electorate. It’s a clash of views that hasn’t been seen since the ‘culture wars’ of the ‘80s and ‘90s.

Obama’s election victory in 2008 was expected to herald a new age in American politics, but the country is increasingly and more bitterly divided with less than nine months until polling day. The choice facing America in November is not only an important one – it may be the decision that defines a society for a generation.

‘Shame!’ The heckle is back and it’s here to stay

Written by Andrew Williams on . Posted in Opinion.

In comedy, heckling is the preserve of those prepared to tread the fine line between bravery and stupidity. The clever catcall, timed to perfection or sharp enough to knock a seemingly infallible performer sideways, is a joy to behold. Alas, in the quick-witted, no-holds-barred world of stand-up, the heckler rarely – if ever – comes out on top. For the comedian, a heckle is the theatrical equivalent of an open goal, a golden opportunity to get a big laugh at the expense of some unthinking audience member whose crime was to assume, usually mistakenly, that they could outwit the talent on stage.

Heckling is not restricted to the dark, beer-soaked rooms of the comedy circuit, however. In the age of 24/7 news media, where every pledge and action and soundbite is microscopically scrutinised, our politicians have almost nowhere to hide from angry members of the public. Yet unlike the comedian, the politician is presented with no such golden opportunity when confronted by the scornful heckler. Whilst the clever comic has licence to eviscerate his opponent in no uncertain terms, it is clearly not politically viable for a Cabinet minister to dismiss a valuable member of the electorate with a barbed jibe or a barrage of expletives.

As such, Health Secretary and professional NHS-botherer Andrew Lansley found himself in something of a quandary when he was greeted at the tall iron gates of Downing Street by scores of furious activists recently. What had started out as a group of hecklers crying “shame!” – hardly unexpected given the controversial nature of the government’s health service reforms – became an embarrassing headline-grabber when Lansley had his path defiantly blocked by June Hautot, a ferocious former union representative. “The waiting lists are going up, so you can wait”, she explained. Lansley could not escape embarrassment; this had become a test of his ability to exercise damage limitation, and to give him his due he kept his cool. Having politely asked the septuagenarian to step aside, he eventually circumvented her as if to say “I’m a very busy man”.

Politicians do not always defuse these sticky situations with such aplomb, however. In 2006, Lansley’s predecessor Patricia Hewitt endured a torrid time at the Royal College of Nursing conference, battling almost an hour of slow handclaps, derisive laughter and jeering before abandoning her speech in an act of surrender. The incident effectively killed off Hewitt’s career as a serious political player. More recently, Gordon Brown’s harrowing experience in Rochdale, which saw him collared by “bigoted old woman” Gillian Duffy just weeks before the 2010 general election, has only served to heighten caution amongst our politicians when it comes to mixing with the public.

Such incidents have precipitated a worrying trend in Westminster. In a bid to avoid the ignominy suffered by Lansley et al, government ministers are being increasingly guarded in their encounters with the general public. At last month’s Warwick Economics Summit, David Willetts was billed to appear as a keynote speaker, only to withdraw at the very last minute. The official reason? “Unforeseen urgent parliamentary business” – and certainly nothing to do with the pasting he suffered at the hands of a group of anti-fees protestors during a lecture at Cambridge University in November. In a pathetic attempt to excuse his absence, Willetts instead submitted a two-minute video which attempted to justify his botched university reforms. He neglected to mention that just three years ago, then-Chancellor of the Exchequer Alastair Darling addressed the very same conference at the height of the banking crisis.

For all of the ridicule that David Cameron’s cringeworthy ‘Webcameron’ initiative deservedly attracted, the Prime Minister understood the importance of engaging with ‘real people’ during his time in opposition. Perhaps most notably, ‘Cameron Direct’ saw the Tory leader travel around the country to take part in a series of US-style ‘town hall meetings’. He would make a short speech outlining his core beliefs and his priorities for government, before taking questions from a receptive audience for over an hour. When we complain that politicians are out of touch and fail to understand our everyday needs and wants, all we really want is to be asked – what can your government do for you? That’s the way to do politics.

Today, too many members of Cameron’s government are content to duck and dive events such as the one at Warwick – and that is in no small part due to their fear of being publicly castigated for the policies which they espouse. But if politicians are to accept the basic tenets of accountability, they must expect to be barracked and shouted down by disgruntled members of the public from time to time – even if they don’t feel they deserve to be. The front benches thrive on confrontation when, come midday each Wednesday, Messrs Cameron and Miliband indulge in a spot of poorly-scripted blood sport. Surely, then, they can handle the occasional tête-à-tête with their electors, the lives of whom they are (at least ostensibly) trying to change for the better?

Short of vitriolic personal abuse or outright violence, we are perfectly entitled to express our views to our elected representatives forcefully and vociferously. Indeed, when executed effectively and with valid reason, heckling can be a vital tool in our democracy. As hard as they try to evade the ire of public opinion, our politicians cannot hide forever. Instead, they should embrace the disagreement, and tackle disaffection head on.

Live: To Kill A King @ Deaf Institute

Written by Patrick Thornton on . Posted in Music.

To Kill a King
Deaf Institute
27 February
3 stars

A slicked-back hair, Topman shirt-wearing buzz has emerged around London-based To Kill a King in the last few months since the release of their latest EP, My Crooked Saint. This quintet have been climbing the London folk-indie pop scene’s ladder and can boast a one-off single ‘Fictional State’, released on Ben (Mumford & Sons)’s record label Communion in May of last year. It would be unwarranted and languid to place TKaK in the same musical genre pie chart that Mumford & Sons hold a monopolistic slice, but one can easily observe the musical crossovers.

That same proverbial buzz seems to have reached our very own Deaf Institute tonight and, probably, would have been largely disappointed by support band Stella Marconi. One cannot fault these four young musicians in their attempts to win over a rather unimpressed crowd, but they could have at least changed their trousers before making their way to sound check straight after school. SM ploughed through cheerful acoustic renditions of grunge tracks ‘Moan’ and ‘False Prophet’, and on to the political punk influenced ‘Cult of Celebrity’, worthy of one Billy Bragg. Despite their uncharismatic presence, the set held plenty of song writing substance and strong potential for this young group of misfits.

To Kill a King’s set was very warmly received by a crowd stood with jaws glued to the floor and eyes fixated on the fantastically named vocalist, Ralph Pelleymounter, as his heart-felt lyrics gently caressed the prevailing microphone. The set merged older tracks such as ‘Fictional State’, reminiscent of The National, with newer upbeat indie pop tracks such as ‘Blood Shirt’. After crashing through the crowd-pleaser ‘Funeral’, TKaK ended on a great performance of ‘Family’. If they continue to produce songs of this magnitude, the future looks bright for these London boys.

To Kill A King – Bloody Shirt (City Sessions)

Feature: Rest in Peace, Davy Jones

Written by Tom Ingham on . Posted in Music.

Davy Jones
30 December 1945 – 29 February 2012

Openshaw born, Monkees front-man Davy Jones sadly passed away this week suffering a heart-attack in his Hollywood home, aged 66.  Spending his early years living in Gorton, Davy found an early taste of fame, making a fleeting appearance in Coronation Street, before going on to be the leading man in the pioneering 60’s pop group. Despite having their TV series cancelled in 1968, they had already achieved world wide fame with a string of hits such as ‘I’m A Believer’, ‘Pleasant Valley Sunday’ and ‘Daydream Believer’. Releasing 9 albums between 1966 and 1970, they were one of the world’s biggest acts, inspiring The Beatles to embrace the power of the screen and make their film ‘A Hard Day’s Night’.

Respects have been flooding in from the great and good, with the likes of Nancy Sinatra, Julian Lennon and Will Smith queuing up to show their appreciation for the legendary front man. The Monkees played a 45th anniversary concert last year to a packed out audience, proving their influence still to this day. A stage musical ‘Monkee Business’ will also be coming to the Manchester Opera house in March, before touring the rest of the UK. A true Mancunian icon, Davy will be remembered as one of the first true pop-stars, a charismatic performer and an incredible human being.

Preview: Beatwolf Records Presents… Strangers

Written by Katie Shepherd on . Posted in Music.

Beatwolf Records Presents… Strangers
Castle Hotel
March 10th

Beatwolf Records is hosting a night this coming Saturday March 10th at The Castle Hotel, showcasing their newly signed band Strangers. With ownership of an upcoming Manchester radio station (to be run by Mike Joyce of The Smiths) and a music magazine already in wide circulation, the Beatwolf label is now working to expand their exposure through live events featuring their signed artists.

Based in London and headliners for the night, Strangers have a sound reminiscent of Depeche Mode while still maintaining the relevance of a modern electro/synth-pop group. The band’s recently recorded single ‘Shine On’ carries a richness created by the use of synthesizer and strong bass yet remains lyrically simple. With an anthem-like chorus and a driving rhythm, the single to be released in mid-April stays true to the sounds Strangers produced on their previous EPs. The three piece band have already begun to establish a haunting persona balanced by the lightness of a dreamlike essence.

Strangers will be joined on the night by The Ghosts, another synth-pop group comparable to a mash up of Passion Pit and Duran Duran. Energy-fuelled musicians, they create a sound that breathes fresh life to the 80s pop revival scene. Also on the night’s line up, Love for Zero offer a less pop, more rock approach to their synth-based music. Both opening acts offer a great set up for the headlining performance by Strangers.

Be sure to join Beatwolf Records this coming Saturday at The Castle Hotel as they host what should prove to be a night of promising new music.

For the Facebook event, click here.

Live: Sleigh Bells @ Academy 2

Written by Jessamine Davis on . Posted in Music.

Sleigh Bells
Academy 2
2nd March
3 stars

Sleigh Bells, a duo based in Brooklyn, NYC, draw a strikingly varied audience, the excitement very apparent in the younger and older members alike. After an annoyingly long build up, front-woman Alexis Krauss arrives on stage in a heavily studded leather jacket, instantly grabbing the attention of the eager crowd and kicking things off to a raucous start. The music is decidedly hard to categorise, the heavy riffs of the guitars all but obliterating the trippy vocals which, at times, leads to an uncomfortable mix of genres. Additionally, imperfect song transitions occasionally produce sounds which are wholly discordant.

Any musical uncertainties, however, begin to fade into irrelevance as Krauss’s all-encompassing stage presence takes precedence. She is incredibly lively, not stopping for a second and the energy onstage is matched unhesitatingly by the crowd. Krauss shouts regular encouragement to the audience, handing the microphone to them and soaking them with water. However it seems a few at the front become too enthusiastic as she instructs them to “keep it fucking happy” and to “knock it the fuck off”.  As electro and hip-hop beats are added into the mix, the sheer ambition of the band becomes apparent and their originality of sound is commendable. The duo play the majority of their first album, Treats, the tracks ‘Infinity Guitars’ and ‘Kids’ being met with particular zeal.

Krauss crowd surfs, her vocals impressively not wavering as she is passed back and forth. An audience member joins her on stage, an occurrence that doesn’t faze the band and they dance together for a remarkable amount of time. The weakest point of the performance remains the often inaudible nature of Krauss’s singing while contrastingly, her screeching is occasionally almost deafening. This aside, the band does give the unwavering impression that there’s nothing in the world they’d rather be doing than performing for us, and this energy ensures an ultimately entertaining show.

Sleigh Bells – Infinity Guitars (live)

Let’s go low carbon

Written by Victoria Root on . Posted in Opinion.

Victoria Root tells us how easy it would be to move to a greener economy.
A recent surge in renewable technology shows that a solution to climate change is possible, so why is nothing being done about it? The planet’s temperature is predicted to rise by around 1.9 degrees Celsius and we must cut carbon emissions by 80-90% before 2050 in order to reduce the harmful consequences, like the extinction of up to 40% of all animal species.
Despite these shocking figures there is still a lack of public awareness about the potential human causes of mass climate change. The US’s decision not to air the climate change themed episode of Frozen Planet last year can only have helped the subsequent poll which showed that a majority in the US believe that if climate change does exist then it is not caused by humans. Measurement of solar activity, however, has shown a marked decline since the mid 1980s and therefore cannot account for rises in global temperature. Plus, ice cores show that carbon dioxide (CO2) has remained constant for the past half a million years, until recent centuries where levels have risen sharply. Human contribution to CO2 emissions may be small, but it is enough to have pushed nature off-balance.

Yet the world’s leading governments still have not taken appropriate action to address this critical issue. Most are afraid to invest in and develop renewable technology for fear of losing money due to a lack of public acceptance; at the moment the US still invests $79 bn a year into shale gas fields, which is three times the amount invested into renewable energy. What’s more, the recent incident at Fukushima in Japan has caused people to lose confidence in nuclear power, even leading the German Bundestag to completely rule out the use of nuclear power in their country (costing them €53 billion in the process).

What commitments we do see at climate change conferences are half-hearted, like the Kyoto Conference in 1997 and every other one since. Worldwide atmospheric CO2 emissions have increased by up to 35 percent since then and Canada withdrew from the treaty earlier this year, with their Environment Minister Peter Kent stating, “Kyoto is not the path forward for a global solution to climate change”. This was mostly due to the main emitters of C02 excusing themselves from the treaty (notably the US and China).
Even though the EU has argued to extend targets from Kyoto to 2017, most countries will now allow their targets to expire unfulfilled by the end of this year.
Many argue that the recent climate-change conference in Durban, South Africa presents a plausible global solution to the climate problem. This new treaty requires both developed and developing countries to cut carbon emissions, but these CO2 targets do not gain legal force until 2020, leaving several years for governments to get caught up in lines of text and board meetings about how far and how quickly countries need to cut their emissions. Keith Allot, head of climate change at WWF-UK, argues that much stronger and much more urgent action is needed to reduce the impacts of global warming.
Sir Nicholas Stern stated that what we do in the next 10 – 20 years can have a profound effect on the climate in the second half of this century; a solution to climate change is needed now, not some time in the future. In the years that we have to wait for the Durban treaty to come into action, we are committing ourselves to a potential four degree increase in global temperature, which is likely to affect global food production and threaten millions of people with floods and drought.

But there are still ways this dystopian future can be avoided and world leaders need to realise that a green economy is both inexpensive and easy to achieve.

Home insulation can be done quickly and efficiently whilst also providing jobs and Carbon-Capture Schemes (CCS), where CO2 is removed from power-plant emissions and injected in reservoirs deep below ground, are promising inventive and new technology. The world’s first CCS was planned for the UK by ScottishPower and had the potential to act as the leading example of CCS in North-West Europe; arguments arose around money and contingency funding due to a lack of government support and the plan fell through.

A recent surge in geoengineering also shows green promise; leading scientists have developed a variety of ways to reduce global warming, ranging from spraying sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere to create a sunshade to turning carbon emissions into rock. There is clearly no lack of solutions, but only a lack of supporting politics and legislation.
The UK is currently aiming to reduce emissions by 80 percent, which would cause the cost of a pint to rise by only six pence and overall consumer goods prices would increase by less than 5 percent. The Stern Report determined that reducing emissions would only cost 1 percent of global GDP; compared to the economic impacts unabated climate change will bring about of up to a 20 percent cut in GDP, this is nothing.
The report concludes by stating that a low-carbon world can eventually benefit the economy by $2.5 trillion per year. In today’s economic climate, low-carbon technology provides an opportunity for investment, jobs and sustainable, well-founded economic growth. It has the potential to transform societies the way railways and information technology have done in previous centuries. If we invest in green technology now it has the potential to benefit us in the long run as, no matter what happens, climate change is happening and it needs to be addressed. The more we delay, the more CO2 is released into the atmosphere and the greater the issues we will be confronted with in the future.

 

Disagree? Tweet us @mancuniondebate or email [email protected]

Hungering for Change

Written by Mercedes Antrobus on . Posted in Opinion.

Mercedes Antrobus considers whether it is the fault of the press that there’s a lot we don’t know about.
As I have insinuated previously in the Mancunion, the press has a certain degree of control over global events.

Over the last year we have all learnt, thanks to the News of the World scandal, that the press is a powerful and potentially dangerous mechanism in society. However, it is not only the means that the press use to gather information that are questionable; it is also the content they choose to publish or ignore.

Back in October (Issue 6, 31 October) I wrote in these pages about Anna Hazare and her anti-corruption hunger strike in India. Some may remember that Hazare managed to be relatively successful in bringing about new anti-corruption laws in India, and that the national and global support he gathered put great pressure on the government to listen to his demands. But how exactly did Hazare gather this support?

Simply put, Hazare’s support was the result of mass global media coverage. Corruption was not new to India and Hazare certainly was not the first to go on a hunger strike in opposition to the government. I now ask when was the last time you heard about Irom Chanu Sharmila?

Sharmila, a political activist from Manipur, has been on hunger strike for almost 12 years in protest of the 1958 Armed Forces Act. Twelve years! Hazare was on strike for barely two weeks. Sharmila is not unknown in the political world and was even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2005, yet the average person does not know about her, because he or she has not been bombarded with images and news of her like they were when Hazare’s movement was occurring.

Sharmila is opposing a law that has caused death and destruction which, in my opinion, is a greater social problem than corruption, though some may disagree. The media’s popularisation of Hazare made all of the difference. Without mass media coverage Hazare would have probably slipped into the shadows appearing in one or two articles at most and the Indian government would have never had to respond to his demands in the same way they never respond to those of Sharmila.

What I want everyone to realise from this example is that there is often a great deal more happening in the world than the press informs us about and if you just dig a little deeper you will often find a piece of news that fell into a single paragraph at the back of the paper or one sentence in a daily newsreel which the media decided was not worth our attention. However, if we give it our attention we may be able to help activists such as Sharmila succeed.

 

Disagree? Tweet us @mancuniondebate or email [email protected]

Rewards for failure

Written by Ben Green on . Posted in Opinion.

Comment & Debate Editor Ben Green takes a look at the real reason behind obscene bonuses, and has a modest proposal for making everything better

In this quasi-free market society of which we are all proud citizens, the economy runs on a simple proposition: the exchange of labour for currency. Companies employ people to make and deliver their goods or services, and in return those people are paid a set wage. These wages are ‘set by the market’ in the sense that those positions which require extensive qualifications, experience, ability and hard work will offer a larger salary than less demanding jobs. This is why bank CEOs earn trillions of pounds a year, whilst students working in Topshop earn 12 pence an hour; because whilst anyone can work in a shop, there are only a few people with experience of running international banking institutions into the ground. So whilst it may seem unfair for those of us who work for next to nothing, the logic is understandable.

As well as these base salaries, many higher-paying jobs also offer the incentive of bonuses. Again, the idea here is solid: if you perform well, and the company benefits from your performance, then you are eligible to receive a supplement to your income, so as to incentivize you to work that bit harder. Bonuses have been common in sales positions since roughly forever, where if you flog more cars, televisions, butter knives or whatever your organisation happens to sell, the company will reward you for bloating their bank balance with a slightly larger slice of the budget. So what’s the problem, surely there can be nothing more economically fair and sensible than companies offering their employees incentives for performing well? After all, everybody benefits; the company only pays out if it sees a visible rise in given performance indicators (profit, brand recognition, processing speed, customer satisfaction etc.) and the employee gets a little extra cash to spend on another hooker.

The problem is that bonuses have ceased being a reward for achievement and have instead become regarded by those at the top as simply part of their pay package, to which they are entitled regardless of their actual performance. It is only recently, in our times of austerity, that such pay has become a headline issue; but this behaviour has been growing in the City for years. Excesses in the vein of Adam Applegarth’s £760, 000 in 2007 for successfully demolishing an entire bank, or the recently mooted £366, 000 bonus for the manager in charge of Europe’s worst rail system are regularly blamed on a lack of shareholder input and oversight. But the real problem here is a refusal to contemplate the idea that we should be rewarded only for what we achieve. It is in this climate that bonuses cease to be a bonus and become an entitlement.

I would argue that this problem is not limited to boardrooms, but that the sense of entitlement at play echoes at all levels of employment. I firmly believe that the wage-for-labour system should be entirely overhauled, so that employees are paid solely on the basis of what they achieve; if you are effective then you are rewarded, if you are not then you need to find something more suited to your talents. Because whilst there are CEOs like (Mr) Fred Goodwin who deserve to be kicked onto the street rather than rewarded, there are others like Sir Philip Green or Sir Stuart Rose who genuinely add value to their companies and so earn their gargantuan payslips. In the same vein, we have all had experiences with useless and unhelpful shop staff, who at the end of the week are paid exactly the same amount as the most friendly and helpful of employees. How on earth is it fair that you can be awful at your job and do nothing to assist the company which hired you, yet earn just as much as someone who devoted themselves to their career and produces excellent results?

Salesmen are already remunerated on the basis of how much they sell; I have even worked for a company where the pay was entirely on commission: i.e. you only get paid if you sold. This angered many people, but to me is the model of how businesses should work. If you were able to sell at that company, you could make a fortune, if you weren’t able to sell, you made nothing; and if you cannot sell, why the hell are you a salesman? Equally, if you cannot effectively manage a company you have no business being a CEO and if you can’t be nice to people regularly, you should not be in customer service. I am all for a national minimum, living, wage, but any remuneration whatsoever above this should be strictly on the basis of how much you deserve that pay.

Disagree? Tweet us @mancuniondebate or email [email protected]

So much for ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’

Written by Dean Webster on . Posted in Opinion.

Taxation is a wonderful thing; it works to fairly raise revenue for the services that we all need.
Tax revenue goes to enabling university access for students from all backgrounds and funding the NHS – the best health service in the world, taking care of every citizen in the country regardless of wealth or social status. It funds the police service and the armed forces, who work tirelessly to allow us to fearlessly and confidently walk the streets of Manchester. Our council taxes finance bin collections (without which Britain would be nothing), libraries, sports centres and schools: the fabric of our communities.

Our public sector is something of which we can be extremely proud. Everyone in this country relies on the services that are funded by taxation, so why is it fair that some people who use those services do not financially contribute to it? Vodafone, Fortnum & Mason and their ilk are all companies that benefit from our communities; they rely on our business and make billions upon billions of pounds from this country’s financial system. By not paying their fair share of tax, they are making a mockery of the infrastructure, services and individuals who are the lifeblood of their businesses.

Ed Lester, head of the Student Loans Company, makes a little shy of £200,000 a year; his attempts to slyly undercut Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs are attempts to undercut you, me and every citizen of the UK. It is especially galling behaviour coming from a public servant and shows a phenomenal level of disregard and disrespect for the very system that is paying his wages.

Thousands of businesses and millions of individuals respect the laws of the land and pay their fair share – what gives these companies and individuals the right not to? Taxation levels are dictated by our ability to pay them. As students we currently do not pay council tax or income tax – not because we cunningly hide our vast wealth in offshore bank accounts, but because we are currently unable to. Once we graduate and (some of us) find gainful employment, we will contribute financially to the system that allowed us to get those qualifications and jobs.

Tax avoidance by companies making millions and by individuals who make tens if not hundreds of thousands of pounds out of swindling the country are greedy and disgraceful. Companies like to preach about their ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ initiatives; it is long past time that these included paying their taxes like everybody else.

Disagree? Tweet us @mancuniondebate or email [email protected]

If I were Ed Lester, I’d have done the same

Written by Ben Green on . Posted in Opinion.

I’m going to give you £100,000. Now here’s the choice: I can either put £60,000 in your bank account and give the rest to the government, or I can put £85,000 in a business account and give you access to it. Which one are you really going to choose? Most of us would like to think that we would take the first option and dutifully pay our taxes, but in reality not a single one of us would: I sure as hell would take the extra £25,000 – even more so if I worked for it.

Now let’s instead pretend (I’m not really giving anyone £100,000) that you own shares in company. Let’s say for want of a better example that company is Vodafone. Now, as a shareholder, you receive a portion of the company’s profits every year it manages not to lose money. This means that the company faces a stark choice of setting up an incomprehensible string of overseas companies to channel money through and ultimately land a not inconsiderable extra wad in your pocket, or hand over two billion quid to the taxman. How livid would you be if, as a shareholder, the company handed over money in taxes that it could have avoided, much like everybody else already does.

Now it is of course fundamental to the maintenance of our society that the government collect taxes: without tax income there would be nothing for the country to base its unaffordable debt mountain on. The fundamental importance of collecting taxes due to them should be enough to motivate the government to go about the task properly. Taxes are only going to be paid if taxpayers, be they individuals or businesses, are compelled to pay them: if I could hold onto my full salary without having to siphon off a chunk of it to the central government I damn well would. But I cannot, because if I do not pay my taxes then I get a fine or go to jail.

However, if I form a company based in an overseas territory with lower corporation tax rates and have my salary paid to it instead of me, then I can waive a significant portion of my tax liability. Lambasting me in the press for doing this would be nonsense, since anybody else who could do it would. What is completely and indescribably ludicrous is the fact that I would be allowed to do this. Although it would be obvious to any vaguely sane individual that I was not in actual fact the CEO of a bona-fide company from Bora-Bora with one employee and no office, the taxman would not tell me to stop being such a dolt and give them their damn money, they would leave me alone because, technically, I have followed the rules.

OK, so there is certainly an argument that we should not be applying common sense to interpret the rules, as such common sense can be subjective and would in any event lead to legal difficulties; but then why not just change the bloody rules? Make it flat out illegal for any business or individual to not pay the full rate of tax on any profit which HMRC can reasonably show has been made in this country, no matter where it has been diverted to.

I fully believe that all businesses and individuals should have to pay their taxes and have to pay the full amount they owe, but it is foolish to blame the ‘tax-dodgers’ for not paying it. The real culprits are the politicians and bureaucrats who do not close tax loopholes because it is those very loopholes which provide their political donations and cosy board positions upon retirement from political office. Do your damn jobs and make people pay their taxes.

 

Disagree? Tweet us @mancuniondebate or email [email protected]

A day in the life of… Virginia Woolf

Written by Rachel Longworth on . Posted in Books.

I woke up in the morning- it was a splendid morning too, looked out of my window, saw the grey sky, my back yard and the overflowing bins. I stream of consciousnessed my way to breakfast, where I was met by Patrick. I didn’t let my housemate guess that I have a mind of my own, so I sat for an hour pretending that I too, was engrossed in Youtube videos.

Did it matter? I asked myself as I walked toward Owens Park bus stop. Did it matter that my student life was about to cease completely? All this must go on without me, was I fearful and nostalgic, or did it console me to know that Kebab King would still be there long after my departure. How unbelievable graduation is!- that is must end, and no one in the whole world would know how I had loved it, every instant…

The door to the magic bus opened.

As the bus moved through Rusholme, I examined the myriad impressions, the innumerable shower of takeaway possibilities. I began to hear an incessant voice, telling me how the HM government were conspiring against me and how the masons are evil. Relief, it was not my in my head, but crazy bus lady.
I received my marked essay on women’s exclusion from literary history; I doubt it will become of seminal importance in feminist studies. I was allowed uncensored access to the John Ryland’s extensive library, boom! I sat there and pondered English Literature; after all I am an English Literature student. Is literature of today a patch on the Elizabethans? I do not want to lay blame with our writers, or professors, but with the crude bundling of amateurs. Words failed me, Omfg I could not find a word to express my emotion, so I surfed the web to find one. I worked a little on my writing, and submitted a first review which is to be published, unsigned in The Mancunion next week.

At the end of a long, elusive and engaging day I went for a walk around Platt fields and considered throwing myself in the lake. But didn’t, and decided instead to drown my dissertation sorrows in a few scoops at the Friendship Inn.

Can Rowling break the mould?

Written by patrick cowling on . Posted in Books.

No one wants to be type cast. Not really. Not even Danny Dyer likes being Danny Dyer anymore, and you know that he used to love being Danny Dyer. It’s a great way to make money of course, if we use the word ‘great’ with the assumption that this greatness entails swallowing every last bit of your pride, credibility and self-respect in one cold phlegmy lump. So why am I yammering on about Danny Dyer and phlegm? Well the benevolent and omnipotent God of the Harry Potter universe, J.K. Rowling is attempting to leave lickle Harry and friends behind and start out on a brave new path of an unspecified ‘adult novel’.

We have already seen this same problem of house hold Harry Potter names trying to break out of that multi-million pound mould that holds them so tightly. Daniel ‘the plank’ Radcliffe stars in The Woman in Black where he desperately avoids anything Potter related. If you haven’t seen it yet you have a terrifying two hours ahead of you where Daniel runs screaming around a house trying to get away from his Potter past. Everywhere he goes there’s a broomstick in a cupboard or a white owl on a windowsill or Ralph Fiennes sitting on the bog.

Hermione Granger got herself a deal to be the face of Burberry, but was controversially dropped because she was a mudblood and had an annoying face. Consequentially she received no points for Gryffindor and lost them the House Cup. Nice one you dick. Let’s not forget the Ginger one. He’s in an Ed Sheeran video being Ginger with another Ginger. Raising awareness that they do indeed have souls.

The difference between the actors and the author however is massive. It’s like the difference between God and the Saints. Yeah they get a fast track into heaven, but God built the bloody gaff! J.K. Rowling has made a tidy pile of galleons for herself with the Potter franchise – and good for her. For an author of children’s books to have a big enough fan-base on both sides of the Atlantic that she was able to seriously bargain with Warner Bros. about the film production, means that she got a whole bunch of kids across the world to read. In this modern world of social networking and games consoles, any author that captures the imaginations of children on such a massive scale deserves huge credit and deserves her financial award. Who knows what her new book will be like, but I wish her all the luck in the world.

Gaff’s: Too big to fail?

Written by Oliver Taylor on . Posted in News.

Gaff’s is not only an off-licence but a brand, selling it’s own t-shirts, possessing a unique range of products and even at one time trialing its own club night. For a shop to inspire the level of devotion from students as it does, the owners must be doing at least the basics right. Basics that any student with an interest in entrepreneurship would do well to learn from.

Their success is mostly built on one thing, in the words of an employee who wished not to be named, “we provide anything that the students want.” In other words, the customer is always right. Gaff’s has a clearly defined target market, being first year Fallowfield campus students, and will bend over backwards to make sure they stock everything a first year could possibly want.

From snacks, event tickets and video entertainment to cheap alcohol and cigarettes, their range of stock aimed at students is unrivalled and more extensive than any of the chains in the area such as Sainsbury’s or Tesco. They also operate at the more student friendly hours of about 1pm to 3am. Even after 3am on busy nights, an efficient service still operates through the loading hatch. In spite of Gaff’s smaller size, by tailoring their service entirely towards the needs of students they out-compete their supermarket rivals by offering a customized student service.

Gaff’s also benefits from extremely low operating costs. By not wasting money on unnecessary new signs, decorations or cleaning they can keep profit margins high whilst keeping prices low. They also employ low cost yet extremely effective forms of advertising. By running word of mouth campaigns amongst students in Fallowfield for offers such as the infamous £1 wine or free t-shirt promotion, students come flocking to get the latest deals.

They have also become increasingly active in social media with almost 4000 friends on Facebook compared to Paz from Kebab King’s comparatively unsuccessful 923. Gaff’s aggressive cost cutting has also been cleverly used to construct their brand image. Relishing in their business’s wheeler-dealer reputation, they know that for every outlandish story that circulates around Fallowfield they simultaneously increase their legendary status amongst students and their customer base.

Lastly Gaff’s is extremely entrepreneurial for a family run business of its type, expanding into more profitable areas and cutting services that don’t make the grade. In 2010 inspired by Dominoes’ success Gaffs started running a late night snack delivery service which has proved popular with students.

Although occasionally running into various regulatory difficulties, Gaff’s continues to innovate and although perhaps their business model is not scalable, it demonstrates how successful a small business can be just by sticking to the basics.

Confessions of a student spring cleaner

Written by Jessica Cusack on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Hi, my name is Jessica, and I’m a neat-freak. OCD about organisation. Addicted to absolute cleanliness.

As you are all probably well aware, students are not the tidiest of creatures, yet my housemates this year – four of my best girlfriends – are all consciously clean creatures. I’ve done well.

Going to other friends’ houses I marvel in the chaos that is theirs, and the order that is mine. I see plates congealing with five-day-old food. Mugs used as ashtrays. Unclaimed stale socks in the living room. Sour milk leaking in the fridge. My glee quickly turns into nausea, anxiety, a nervous feeling in my stomach.

I return to my cosy house of clean crockery and well-stacked cupboards, where washing up and laundry are done quickly and without fuss, even if it is slightly annoying that I have to make a trip to the OP laundry room every ten days to dry my bed sheets, lest they touch the floor when hanging wet in the bathroom.

But while my housemates and I make every effort to keep a tidy house, a world away from the horrors described above, it seems as though the house itself won’t let us. Why does that horrible black mouldy stuff still appear on the grouting in the bath when I cleaned it a few days ago? Why is the sink looking grey again? Why are there little nooks and crannies which are, in all honesty, simply grim? And what is with this dust?! Dust, dust everywhere. You dust and the dust doth not depart.

It doesn’t help sharing the top floor with two other girls who also have very long hair, and therefore moult constantly. It’s sickening. And heartbreaking. Mr. Muscle has let me down.

Yet the cherry on top of a very unpleasant cake was when last week my housemate heard a scratching… a squeaking… and a mouse scurried across the kitchen floor. A mouse. You have got to be joking. A mouse – vermin – in my kitchen? Me, the cleanest, neatest, most tidy girl in all the land? I was, and still am, incensed, exasperated and offended.

PETA members look away now but I have vowed to have that mouse destroyed by any means. Bait boxes and traps have been laid, and I am close to inviting the neighbour’s cat in for a Tom and Jerry style-session.

While I am trying to not let my situation upset me too much, I can’t help feeling cheated – Manchester, how has this happened to me? And what can I do about it? Well, I’ll tell what I’m gonna do about it, and it’s an ensemble involving marigolds, bleach, an old toothbrush and a hoover. Watch this space. This very neat, clean, white space.

No-robics

Written by Emily Brown on . Posted in Lifestyle.

There were six houses at my school.  I was in the crap one.

Year-on-year, the statuses of the different houses would rise and fall to a degree but mine remained stationary in the lower half of the coolness rankings. We had the worst common room, the most repugnant toilets and a crusty Head of House who was unmercifully branded a paedo at every opportunity.

However, what cemented our duff position was the fact that my house was home to the schools worst athletes, finishing last in every inter-house sporting competition: including the daddy of them all, cross-country.

As with many things, especially those which were sport-related, I took issue with several elements of the Inter-House Cross Country competition. Firstly, the fact that this brutal event took place on perhaps the only flat surface in the town; the school fields. Why, you ask, would you be complaining about a constant flat surface? Undoubtedly it made everything easier; however it also made everything really rather dull. A few hills and potholes would have given the whole sorry experience an element of risk.

Secondly, why hold it in November? Considering our P.E. uniform consisted of a bottle green polo top and a revolting grey pleated skirt, I’m sure by running around a frozen field many young girls unwillingly had their eggs cryogenically frozen by the Atlantic breeze that blustered about my town.

Finally, and most pertinently, cross-country was not a test of my sporting skill; it was a vehicle for my embarrassment. In 2005, my sister came first in the year 7 race; I came last in the year 9 one. It has left a bitter taste in my mouth about exercise ever since.

This ongoing ill-feeling towards exercise of all kinds then really doesn’t explain why this year on Valentine’s Day, a day where I should supposedly be doing something I enjoy, I found myself stood at the back of an overcrowded aerobics class.

Maybe I was punishing myself for being single? Or was I subconsciously trying to evoke my inner lesbian by spending an hour watching bottoms gyrate around a room? Whatever it was that drew me there, I now know for certain it will not be hooking me back next Tuesday. Aerobics is for maniacs.

 

There were many, many things I disliked about the whole experience, but here are a choice few:

1. If your vision is poor, you may as well go home: like any normal person, I migrated to the back of the room in the hope that no poor soul would have to look to me as a source of secondary instruction. However, one of the problems with being on the back row if you are as short-sighted as I am means you end up making up your own routines, rather like being the girl at the school disco who doesn’t know the Macerena properly.

2. The ‘Trickle-Down’ Effect: again, the further you stand towards the back, the more likely you are to copy the girl in front who has no concept of left and right, cue smashing into your neighbour and throwing the rest of the line out of kilter for the rest of the rep.

3. The Effect on Down-Below: Lunges in quick succession. Squats in even quicker succession. Leaping from a bottom-grazing-the-floor stance to sudden pogo-stick straightness left me feeling like my gut was about to make a swift exit via my lower body.

4. The possible side effect on your relationship with your housemates: I wasn’t lonely this Valentine’s, for I was nestled between my two housemates.  When it came to doing the sideways-lying leg-lift I got a full-blown view of what it would probably be like to share a bed with each of them in an intimate sense. It wasn’t an experience I was particularly lusting after, and it’s not a memory I’m particularly keen on retaining either.

5. The After-Effects: Technically the after-effects of this peppy workout are a good thing, a sign that I’ve at least pushed my body to some undetermined limit. However, three days on, I’m struggling greatly to get up the stairs if I’m carrying any other weight except that of my own body. When I turn my neck, it sounds as if I’m grinding corn between my vertebrae. For some reason my chest is so tight I have to crack it once every hour, which in turn looks as if I’m trying to proffer my cleavage towards unsuspecting and unwelcoming strangers.

 

Despite the fact that my body is physically (and painfully) telling me that what I did was of some benefit to it, I don’t think that almost wanting to throw myself down on the floor and sob in a oww/woe is me-induced state ten minutes in is ever going to aid my mental wellbeing. For now, I’ll stick to the treadmill. Or the biscuits.

The Lent Diet

Written by NatalieClark on . Posted in Lifestyle.

So as everyone is pretty much aware, Lent is well and truly underway. Shrove Tuesday was happily indulged in, pancakes being tossed left right and centre, and I can certainly say that my household bulldozed through tubs of Nutella, syrup and kilos of sugar.

The conversation around the table, in between shoveling pancakes into our gobs, revolved around what we vowed to give up for Lent as of the following day. The responses that followed: chocolate, crisps, carbs, Dixy Chicken, Facebook, Daily Mail Online.

The days leading up to Ash Wednesday had been full of these same dialogues, and really, each one had the same answers. Each year, we “sacrifice” the same indulgences for forty days and forty nights, hoping to drop a few pounds, or to complete the challenges we set ourselves.

But let me break it down for you right now. If you are giving chocolate, or sweets, or bread, that is not Lent you are participating in. It is a diet.

If you have decided to not go on Facebook or Twitter for the next two fortnights, that is not Lent you are participating in. It is just leaving the virtual world for a little while and stepping into reality.

Now don’t get me wrong, Lent as a religious observance for all those who are of the Christian faith is probably the most serious in the Christian calendar. Lent commemorates the time when Jesus went into the desert to fast and pray for forty days, a period of sacrifice, reflection and preparation before the celebration of Easter.

Before, fasting for the entire duration of Lent was common practice, but now, Christians mainly surrender luxuries to serve as self-discipline. The significance of this practice within Christianity leads me to believe that it is slightly odd that those that aren’t Christian jump on the bandwagon in order to shift a few pounds.

I am not a Catholic. I don’t go to church. All in all, I am not a religious person. So why should I engage in a spiritual practice that I don’t engage on a daily basis? People don’t lend themselves to other religious festivals to use as excuses to achieve some kind of personal goal.

We don’t participate in Ramadan or Passover because it may work into what we want for ourselves. So why should Lent be a time when we attempt to lose inches from our waistline, avoid posting on walls or tweeting every few minutes?

I think, if you wanted to give up cake and late night takeouts so that you would look great on the beach during your Easter break, or give up Facebook because you need to really knuckle down and meet all of those looming deadlines, you should not rely on Him to help you through it.

Really, (and we are getting deep here) it should all come from your own personal strength and commitment at any time of the year.