<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>

<title>Oliver Bothwell's Thoughts &amp; Opinions</title>
<link>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts</link>
<description>Thoughts &amp; Opinions from Oliver Bothwell.</description>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 16:26:35 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<language>en-gb</language>

<item>
<title>The General Election.</title>
<link>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#generalelection</link>
<guid>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#generalelection</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 16:26:35 GMT</pubDate>
<description>It appears that May 6th will be the date of the next general election, turnout is set to be a record-breaking low. The last two elections in 2001 (59.4%) and 2005 (61.4%) have had the lowest turnout, by 10%, since 1945. There is an argument which states that a low turnout is really a good thing: it shows people are so content there is nothing to worry about, and so no need to vote. However, it seems more likely that this lack of participation, a fundamental necessity of our democracy, is actually due to a lack of differentiation between the parties.</description>
</item>

<item>
<title>The House of Lords.</title>
<link>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#houseoflords</link>
<guid>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#houseoflords</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 6 Dec 2009 17:17:27 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The House of Lords could be the best part of our parliamentary system. Here is where laws are properly scrutinised by legal experts, there are political ties but it is not an elected house and so we do not end up with the problems of the American system where legislation is bounced between the Houses, getting nowhere. The House of Lords does have the power to reject legislation, although the government can 'push' it through if it is voted through Parliament three times. This is as it should be the executive have been elected with a mandate by the people and should be allowed to introduce legislation. Rejections should not be on political grounds, but practical.</description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Global warming.</title>
<link>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#globalwarming</link>
<guid>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#globalwarming</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:07:27 GMT</pubDate>
<description>I had the misfortune to sit in front of a rather obnoxious gentleman on the bus this afternoon. He was ranting on his phone about various themes, from X Factor to hating Americans and vegetarians. One issue he mentioned rather loudly was the increase in evidence that global warming doesn't exist. This interested me. Let's say, just for a moment, that global warming isn't a result of man burning fossil fuels and polluting the Earth with carbon dioxide. It is nature itself and there's nothing we've done to cause it and nothing we can do about it. OK, what's changed? Nothing. What are the issues climate change protesters or 'green' people promote?</description>
</item>

<item>
<title>The selfish problem.</title>
<link>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#selfishproblem</link>
<guid>http://www.oliverbothwell.co.uk/thoughts#selfishproblem</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
<description>I have been getting increasingly angry recently over the common disregard for other people. We have a population with a duty and responsibility to vote who do not register and do not go to the polling stations to create a legitimate government. We see voters, voting not for the benefit of everyone in society but for themselves, thinking selfishly about their issues and their problems rather than the country as a whole. We have politicians who are untrustworthy and corrupted by power; too selfish to give it up even though they know they are not running the country effectively and are not acting on the mandate of the people.</description>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>