GUEST COLUMN

---

E.MAIL HOAXES & URBAN MYTHS

By Andy Smallbone

I have been a resident of Cranham for the past 9 years and have worked in the IT industry for the past 16 years, working for companies like Amstrad, GE Capital and am currently working for Royal Bank of Scotland for the past 8 years. I was also the Young IT Technician in 1992 and silver medallist in the Youth Skill Olympics in 1993 held in Taiwan.

So what does this all have to do with emails? Well it means I’ve pretty much seen it all when it comes to supposedly helpful emails giving you good sound advice about not getting out of your parked car when a gentlemen asks for you help with his shopping or advice to do with a card through your door asking you to call a number that will cost you £15 a minute.

Even if the e.mails seems to have come from somewhere genuine, like the police, I can guarantee at least 99.9% of them are hoaxes. An IT literate person can spoof their email address to look like it comes from anyone in 2 seconds and even a complete novice can do this in something as simple outlook. Always check the source thoroughly and the best option is to assume it’s untrue unless you can prove without a shadow of a doubt it’s real. A good way to find out is to simply cut and paste part of the email into a search engine like Google and you'll probably find lots of references to what you’ve received.

Experts suggest that around 90% of the emails send around the world are actually spam (and these fake emails are exactly that) so don’t consider passing them onto friends and family as many of them suggest as your just helping to add to this world problem, unless like I said your absolutely certain its actually true, also consider that some of these emails can actually make people worry unnecessarily due to their content.

Now what extra help to combat these emails is their? Well one place to start is a site called Hoax Slayer (http://www.hoax-slayer.com). They produce a monthly email newsletter informing you of all the latest hoaxes floating around the internet but you can also just browse the site. If you want to check on premium rate numbers and what their charges are and who runs the number try ICSTIS ( http://www.icstis.org.uk/) they are the regulator of premium rate numbers and list all UK and Foreign prices. Another pretty good site is http://www.snopes.com/ they have lots of info on all sorts of urban legends. Lastly lots of the antivirus sites like Symantec have info on fake emails.

Well I hope this has been of some use to you and put your mind at rest that most of these emails are actually just made up hoaxes, they prey on people not knowing any better and that reason alone I despise them. This problem is not going to go away and, if anything, your inbox will get more and more full with this kind of spam.

5.2.07

---

DAVID GARFIELD

 

An Introduction

I am grateful for the Editor's invitation to contribute to the Guest Column
this month. Although I was born near Oxford, and spent some years away at School from 11-17 years and over six years in New Zealand and Australia in the 1970s – Rainham has always been my home.

I am trained as a Technical Artist, and have also worked in Advertising.

For over twenty years I have been an Environmental Campaigner & Cycling Advocate, and currently volunteer part-time with the London 21 Sustainability Network.

Perhaps it’s because my Zodiac sign is Libra that I have always been concerned about balance and fairness – and have become preoccupied with the anomalies of our current electoral process.

 

ELECTORAL REFORM

As I write, we United Kingdom Citizens are about to express our democratic choice of Parliamentary Representative and Government for the next few years, so I thought it would be opportune to discuss Electoral Reform.  I would like to stress that, currently, I don’t have set loyalty to any particular Party.

For any democracy to work successfully, there must be a fair, representative and accountable Electoral System.  Palpably, the system currently in use in the UK is not properly representative, and it is only ‘fair’ in that it applies equally to all participants.

It is described as ‘First past the Post’ (FPTP,) in which the constituency Candidate with the highest number of votes wins the Parliamentary Seat.  It was probably intended originally for a two-party scenario, so is now thoroughly outdated. 

In fact, we don’t really have a democracy at all.  For example, a contentious Seat may attract, say, six Candidates – each with a realistic chance of success.  The winning contender may poll 20% or less of votes cast, totalling only a few more than his or her nearest rival, yet take the Seat.  All the remaining votes count for nothing.

A few years ago, the Liberal Democrat Party polled some 23% of the popular vote, yet won only 6% of the seats in Parliament.  Although it hasn’t yet happened in practice, it is arithmetically possible to achieve far worse results than this!  Clearly, this is grossly unfair and unrepresentative to a large section of our Electorate – and goes some way to explain why that Party traditionally embraces the principle of Proportional Representation (PR.)

I am also an enthusiast of PR, which gives a much fairer and representative result, but there are several versions of it and I readily acknowledge that there can be certain intrinsic disadvantages: —

§ It can be very laborious and time-consuming to count results.  If a re-count is called, the effect is compounded.  Not infrequently, this amounts to several days.

§ Ballot Papers can be complicated to complete satisfactorily.*

§ Minor Party, independent, single-issue and/or disruptive Candidates can gain undue influence in preferential systems unless some kind of ‘threshold’ for representation is imposed.  (In Eire, for example, I believe this is set at 10% of the constituency vote – a completely arbitrary figure.)

§ It has gained a reputation for producing weak and fractious coalition Governments in some Countries.

Conversely, although it produces a wholly unfair and unrepresentative result, the FPTP system does have some advantages: —

§ It is quick and relatively simple to count results.  I think the record at a UK. General Election is around 45min.

§ It produces a comparatively clear-cut result.

What I propose, therefore, is a system which adopts the best features of the two disparate systems, with some additional refinements.

1) At Constituency level, the FPTP arrangement would be retained: i.e. the Candidate receiving the highest no. of votes would gain the Seat.  From here on, differences would apply.

2) The votes cast for each of the Candidates would be added to the votes for all the other Candidates of the same political Party or Grouping throughout the Country, with the percentage of the total popular vote being calculated.

3) There are 650 Seats in Parliament; one Seat gives one vote.  I propose that an additional 350 votes should be made available – to give a round one thousand – for proportional distribution.

4) Each party would continue to receive one vote per Seat, PLUS sufficient of the additional votes to represent as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote attained.  (In the example cited previously, the Liberal Democrats would receive 39 Seats/votes plus 191 distributed votes to make a total of 230 votes to represent their true proportion of the overall popular vote.)

5) To create a ‘natural’ threshold – as opposed to an arbitrary measure as mentioned previously – a Party would only need to win one Seat anywhere in the Country to **qualify for the distributive votes.  Successful single local issue (i.e. ‘Save our local Hospital’) and/or independent Candidates would not qualify, of course.

“None of the above”

I would like to see a section for “none of the above” included on the Ballot Paper for Voters who wished to exercise their right to vote, but who did not wish to support any of the Candidates standing.  The results would be taken forward into the overall calculations as described above.

Voter turn-out

I believe that another advantage of my proposed system is that it would provide more incentive to vote – thereby addressing the worrying problem of low turn-out – as a very high proportion of votes would count.

*While resident in Western Australia in the 1970s, I took part in the State Election – a multi-member Constituency vote based on a preferential system of PR.  Voting was compulsory.  To register the vote one desired, it was necessary to place nearly 50 Candidate names in an ideal order.  Not only had one to place one’s preferred Candidate(s) at the head of the list, one had also to place one’s least favoured option(s) at the very foot of the list.  All names had to be included or the ballot was spoiled.  Party workers would hand out a guidance list which electors were allowed to take into the Polling Station.  However, if one didn’t wish to vote on Party lines, and preferred to spread one’s votes, the task became even more complicated. 

**i.e. The Green Party may win one Seat, but poll 1.5% of the popular vote.  Therefore, the one elected Member would be entitled to 15 total votes in the House.

The “wasted” Vote

From time to time, we’ve all heard the anguished refrain: – “I’d like to vote for the ‘X’ Party, but they don’t stand a chance around here: it would just be a wasted vote.”  Of course, if enough of an electorate thinks in that way, it is a largely self-fulfilling prophecy; a prophecy encouraged by our present system. 

Conversely, the real “wasted” vote occurs in a Constituency with a large majority for the winning Candidate.  In the FPTP system, it takes only one vote more that the nearest rival to secure the Seat; all the other thousands of votes are quite unnecessary!

(This explains how a Party in power can poll less of the popular vote than Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition.  The Party in opposition may win many/most of its Seats with overwhelming majorities, while the governing Party wins many/most of its Seats with small majorities.  This is yet another anomaly of FPTP.)

“Rolling” Elections

Together with my proposed electoral reform for increased and improved representation, I would also like to see enhanced accountability through the use of “rolling” Elections. 

By this means, a different proportion of the Parliamentary Seats (say, a quarter or a fifth) would be contested annually.  This would ensure that MPs enjoyed a similar security of tenure as at present but, at the same time, would achieve a greater degree of awareness of, and responsiveness to public opinion by Parliament.  No doubt there would be some initial to-ing and fro-ing between Governments of different Parties, but it is my contention that there would be a settling-down process until a high degree of consensus Government would result.

Under our current (possible) five-year term arrangement, there is a strong temptation for Governments wishing to retain power to curry favour by offering “sweeteners” to the Electorate.  Then, after the Election, comes the “nasty-tasting medicine” as the populace are called upon to pay.  All this takes place whether or not it is the right action for the national interest.  In other words, decisions are taken for political expediency rather than economic or fiscal etc. need.  This would hardly be possible with the “rolling” Election principle in place.

General Elections could still be called if necessary, but this would be highly unlikely under normal circumstances.

These are my ideas; what do you think?  Please send any comments or observations to the Website Editor and/or e-mail to me at diesgy@yahoo.co.uk .

---

UPMINSTER COURT & HAVERING’S HORTICULTURAL HERITAGE

By Lois Amos

It’s hard to imagine in these times of supermarkets and convenience stores, and garage forecourts that 100 years ago the maps of Upminster, Romford and Hornchurch, like much of the outskirts of Central London, showed many areas of nurseries and glasshouses and productive market gardening.

Fresh vegetables and seasonal fruits were grown locally to supply the market stalls and small stores for the villagers and their families. Many people, of course, grew their own vegetables, top, cane and soft fruits, and maybe kept a few chickens, pigs, goats and even cattle. Food didn’t travel for more than a few miles, and certainly peas were not being flown half way round the world! Upminster at the turn of the century was a very different place, one without cars, traffic jams and air travel.

By horse and cart to Brickfields

The brick kilns in Bird Lane were producing bricks for building houses for the new city workers being encouraged to leave the countryside and live and work in London. The urban sprawl was in its infancy and new housing estates were just becoming a reality. Samuel Williams and his family owned a Shipping and Transport Company who transported coal from the North down by sea to the Thames, and then it travelled by horse and wagon to the Brickfields. The William’s Company also had a small fleet of Dredgers operating in the Thames and the spoils of their activities were deposited on the banks of the Thames at Dagenham.

Samuel had two sons, Varco and Arthur Edward. They became a wealthy and prominent family. Varco lived at Langtons and Arthur at Upminster Court. The house celebrates its Centenary next year.

The coming of the Railway in the late eighteen hundreds had opened up the countryside and in the rural idyll of Upminster the commuter belt began. The desirable residential area, still reachable from London with relative ease, grew and thrived. Large houses were built amongst the villager’s humble buildings. Upminster Court still is the largest and only example of a manor house built from local bricks, produced not a quarter of a mile away from where the brick earths were dug. The Court was self-sufficient with its productive walled kitchen garden creating a protected micro- climate for earlier crops and ripening exotic fruits.

Such was Arthur’s wealth that he built not one, but two, walled gardens. The second walled garden was Italianate, with an intricate design of low box hedges and gravel paths. The garden was viewed from the Drawing Room and the walls were clothed with fine climbing plants and shrubs for their decorative value. Having such a garden was a status symbol. To also have a fine range of glasshouses running along the curtilage wall was also considered to be quite grand.

Only listed gardens in Havering

These glasshouses are breathing their last dying breaths. The glass is broken, the Jarra (Eucalyptus wood), one of the hardest and most durable of woods, fresh from Australia in 1906 has put up a brave fight, but years of neglect and redundancy is now taking it’s toll. The fine Edwardian Glasshouses, are Grade Two Listed as are the Gardens and the House. The gardens are, in fact, the only Listed Gardens in the Borough, and appear on the Database and Listings for the English Heritage National Register of Gardens of Historical and National importance. I am proud to have personally achieved this Listing for Upminster Court over two years of letter writing, phone calls and inspections in my ‘spare’ time.

The glorious stout and decorative cast iron bench supports no longer groan under the weight of pots, but flake gently into oblivion. The winding gear, plain and beautifully functional, rusts quietly away. Feral Ash and Sycamore take root and peep out of the vents. Vestiges of the cold and hot frames can still be seen when the weeds are parted. How tragic.

The entrance to the Walled Italianate Garden is marked by a superb and beautiful iron gate, the work of the apprentice blacksmith at Upminster Court. He would have made this gate as a testimonial piece to illustrate how he had learnt his craft well. It is sadly in need of urgent repair and renovation.

Upminster Court has a pair of Croquet Lawns, Bowling Green, Tennis Court, and shrubberies arranged around radial and axial paths. The steps are of finest Portland stone, and the terrace was of superb York stone - long ago pilfered. There are many fine ornamental and native mature trees, some shown on the maps of 1841, a glorious twisted Chestnut, estimated at around 130 years old and thus predating the house. The gardens are reduced in size, as approximately 20 acres were sold off to the Golf Club in the twenties. The River Ingrebourne still runs to the south west of the property and is fed from the drainage ditches and spring. The Friends and Volunteers opened up the woodland wilderness path and restored it two winters ago.

The Head gardener Mr. Frederick Pomfrett, who tended the gardens along with his pot boy, and apprentices, met and fell in love with a parlour maid, later to be his wife. They must have courted in the gardens. They eventually moved to Norfolk, but before they both died, they requested their ashes to be interred in the Italianate Garden. Their grave is virtually unmarked, as the Borough did not wish to set a precedent for such rituals.

Upminster Court had a fine Carriage and black horse. Walter Pink handled the driving, and later was to be photographed in the mid - twenties with the family’s new car, a Ford, of course. There were only four cars in the area at the time! Samuel Williams had sold the land at the side of the Thames to Henry Ford for the building of the Dagenham Motor Plant.

The architect of Upminster Court, Sir Charles Reilly also developed the plans for housing to accommodate the newly required workforce, and as most of them had come from the countryside, he planned small green grassed areas, (known later as ‘Reilly Greens’) to help them feel at home, so the village green was not far away.

Charles Reilly’s friend Reginald Blomfield, may have designed the gardens at Upminster Court. He was a very famous and prominent garden designer of his time, advocating the plain formal and symmetrical gardens in keeping with the formality of the buildings. Ellen Willmott may have walked these paths to advise on plantings, as her gardens at Warley Place in Brentwood, were a short carriage ride away.

This part of Havering, now absorbed into Greater London, has a rich heritage of horticulture. William Coys, plant hunter, botanist and plantsman, established a rare collection of new plants at Stubbers Walled Garden. Tomatoes, Rhubarb and many plants now familiar to us, started out from Stubbers. Bower Park had magnificent gardens landscaped by the famed Bridgman. Langtons had glasshouses, conservatory and an orangery in which grew the exotic fruits popularised by the Victorians.

Bedford’s Park Mansion demolished in 1959, by the Council, may only now have its steps remaining and recently restored, but tucked away from the public’s gaze is a particularly fine and rare Georgian Walled Garden circa 1750’s, comparable with the one at Audley End in size. Once loved and tended, used by the Borough and under the direction of Manager David Oxley, its nursery produced superb potted specimen plants and hanging baskets for beautification and display at the Town Hall and Langtons. Now completely closed, abandoned and viciously vandalised. The aluminium stripped, glass in shards, fabric of brick walls smashed. A brand new, fully automated glasshouse, some years ago, used for just one season, a heap of twisted metal amongst the weeds and mosses. The old Fern House stares sadly into a dark and unpromising future.

Compulsory Competitive Tendering has a lot to answer for. The Nation’s growing and pride in its Borough Nurseries was killed off during those years. Havering’s been no exception.

It would be a great loss to our local, historical and horticultural heritage if these wonderful and valuable assets were to be lost forever.

6,000 new people needed this year

There is a tremendous shortage of skilled gardeners, botanists, garden historians and conservationists, countryside skills and craftspeople in the land-based sector. Government needs to be putting pressure on and give funding to, the trainers to provide young people, with these skills. Horticulture is perceived as a cold, wet, uncomfortable and lowly paid profession, which may, to a certain extent be true: but the job satisfaction, healthy lifestyle and independence that comes with being a skilled gardener far outweighs the disadvantages. A good gardener is worth his/her weight in gold!

Britain’s gardening and horticulture is in trouble. Young people are not being encouraged locally to come into horticulture. Schools and Careers offices do not generally include it in their recommendations. Why not? The industry has to find 6,000 new people this year alone. The skills shortage must be addressed if our parks, gardens and growing heritage are to survive. The outlook may be bleak. Gardens and allotments are disappearing fast and a concrete and paved future awaits the next generations.

If anyone is interested in joining the friends and Volunteers of Upminster Court, or the Friends of Bedford’s Park please contact Lois at 01708-704619 or at work 01708 222478.

Together we can make a difference!

Lois Amos
Horticulturalist and Lecturer

---

GUEST COLUMN

HOW YOU CAN HELP YOUR LOCAL POLICE