Hi there…

My apologies to regular readers – I’ve been somewhat awol blog-wise.

After the week of labour action at the end of January I’ve been focused on my PhD research, which is kind of a priority.  As a result I’ve put the blog somewhat on the back-burner.

I haven’t been completely absent though.


I’m actually referenced, along with the blog, in a Letter to the Editor (LTTE) in the RG concerning the whole fiasco relating to Leah Scott.  I’ve written a reply, also in the form of a LTTE for the RG, and I hope it will be published soon.  As such I’ll not add anything further in relation to this particular LTTE at this time.

On the matter of Leah Scott’s plagiarism fiasco I’ve also got a press release on Bernews.

Basically, I argue that she shouldn’t have plagiarised in the first place, but having been caught out she had an opportunity to fully apologise and use it as a ‘learning moment’ to hammer home to our students the seriousness of plagiarism as an academic offence. Instead, she acted disingenuously and it’s because of that disingenuity that – to me – warrant her to resign as the Junior Minister of Education.

Or be made to resign…

Voting Rights for Prisoners?

I also have an opinion piece, complete with a draft amendment to the Parliamentary Election Act 1978, arguing that granting votes to certain prisoners (those with a sentence of less than 12 months – or with less than 12 months remaining on their sentence; or on parole) should have the right to vote.

I argue that this is in line with the concept of restorative justice and, while the link didn’t go into the published article, is also in line with the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights concerning voting rights for prisoners.

Mini-Platform on Drugs – Alcohol Section

In addition, I have released the first part of mini-platform on drugs.  I wrote this last summer but have held off releasing it for some time.  I’ve decided to release it in part, section by section, beginning with the alcohol part.

One thought on “Hi there…

  1. Plagiarism without reference to the original is wrong, no two ways about it. Many do it – (you have referenced Ewart Brown previously) – but Leah Scott’s miserable attempt to cover her tracks was pitiful at best.

    Warrant her resignation? Not in my opinion. It does, however, have the downside effect that what ever she pens in the future will have even less credibility than it might otherwise have had; if, indeed, it had any at all in the first place that is.


    I have ever understood blood alcohol limits and their relationship to the individual. Why is 85 mg (of itself) ok? Is that appropriate for some but not others? Likewise, why is 50 mg ok? Are these limits supportable in any way by fact? Are you safe at 49 mg – but not at 51 mg?

    Aren’t these limits arbitrary? Even if they equate to 1 glass of wine or a beer, are we saying that one is not impaired – at least potentially – if that is what you have?

    What does 20 mg equate to in terms of what you drink?

    Beats me.

    If you are going out to have a drink – and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that – don’t drive. It’s not rocket science. How sad the case where you are legally within the limit, yet you cause an accident.

    Let’s just make it “driving = no alcohol”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s