(With thanks to Betapolitics for finding the article that made me think more about this!)

I was on the tube this morning, listening to the usual never-ending cascade of scratchy announcements from the tannoy. There were 8 during the time I waited to change; only one of them had anything to do with any tubes that were coming soon (the Circle line was, just for a change, having problems) but didn’t actually give any information about when the next one was due.

The other seven were all about the gap, the change from a circle to a loop, and MOST maddeningly, moving right down inside the carriage.

There have already been plenty of complaints about the endless announcements, from David Willetts, or from the residents of Sydenham. But other than the annoyance, there is a wider point.

Moving down inside the carriage is what should happen naturally. People should look around and notice that the carriage is filling up. They should consider others without being told to. It is damaging to our sense of independence, adventure, and basic decency to be told to do something that is so obviously a necessity of mass travel.

The Economist article makes a similar point. It is not healthy for someone else to always make decisions for us. It is healthy for us to have as much control over our own lives as possible. And that includes deciding where to stand in a busy Tube carriage.

In 2006, an email with a very limited distribution list was leaked from inside CCHQ. It wasn’t a very important email and didn’t let out any big secrets so it wasn’t really the end of the world. But quite interesting nonetheless…

At the time, the BBC was showing  ’The Amazing Mrs Pritchard‘ which was about a complete political novice who had somehow ended up as Prime Minister (I seem to remember there was a great degree of disgust at the political classes… sound familiar?!), and she was a sort of common sense, get on with it, localist Prime Minister, who was worn down in office by great disillusionment and despair.

The email which was leaked went something like: ‘We’re looking for ideas to show how individuals, communities, and international actors can take different types of similar actions to make a contribution to the fight against climate change. For example, on Mrs Pritchard last night, she banned all cars for a day.’

I can’t quite remember what we ended up doing for this particular idea – I think it developed into the Climate Change Bill Now campaign (for which I still have a campaign tshirt).  But the important thing was this: there are actions which can be taken in varying degrees of commitment by anyone, no matter how small they are.

I was reminded of this by the huffing and puffing over the prospect of no cars being allowed into London in order to meet emissions regulations – reading about it, there wouldn’t be many days, and actually when I lived in Paris it was really nice not having cars everywhere on Sundays (lots of streets are closed to traffic).  Obviously there would need to be exemptions for some, and clearly it would mean that people would need to plan their time carefully to minimise their need to take the car. But I like the fact that Boris seems keen to investigate the idea.

I know that the person whose email was leaked was absolutely incensed by it (lack of trust, zero public interest, someone trying to make a name for themselves by having ‘insider’ information). But maybe it was a good thing after all – the very fact that people are now talking about the idea as a possibility shows that it wasn’t so crazy after all.

Hazel Blears has become the latest member of the Cabinet to fall in behind the frankly bonkers idea that legal migrants should be charged extra to live here on top of the taxes they pay.  

I’ve written before about what a discriminatory and divisive idea this is.  But on top of that – this is just a ridiculous idea. £50 each is hardly going to make a big difference – for example, the police in Cambridgeshire say that migrants cost them an extra £1million a year.  I can’t imagine that there are 20,000 legal migrants every year into Cambridgeshire; and on top of that, what about schools, hospitals, dentists, wear and tear on roads, binmen… all the other public services?

What the government needs to do is not attack easy targets like legal migrants, who obey the rules and work hard for a better life, but instead focus on the real problem – the fact that significant numbers of people come here illegally, break the rules and do not pay their fair share.

This is where I have a lot of sympathy for Boris Johnson’s idea of an earned amnesty for illegal immigrants.  They’re here. There’s no realistic way that all (or even most) of them will ever be deported, and frankly they often do horrible jobs which need to be done.  Showing a commitment to a way of life, being part of society, and – yes – paying taxes are all reasons that I can see an argument for negating the fact that they broke the law in the first place by entering Britain.

It’s something that deserves rational consideration – unlike yet another ‘British Jobs for British Workers’-esque headline.

I noticed some interesting snippets from the mayoral results: UKIP came seventh. Sian Berry (Green) came fourth. Brian Paddick (Lib Dem) did really badly. There are reasons for all of these, and I’d suggest that a lot of them are based on what the Conservatives are doing in setting today’s political agenda. 

• There are more important things than the European Union for most people. I know that’s hard to accept for some, but it’s not a vote-clincher. People tend to worry about more immediate concerns – their mortgage, the cost of feeding their family, whether their children are being properly educated, whether their local hospital will be there for them if they need it.
• The environment is important to people – and voters want someone to actually take decisions to improve the environment (which does not mean hidden tax rises, but does mean changes to the way the tax system works to help people be greener in their daily lives). 
• The Lib Dems have lost their dual purpose of being the anti-Conservative, anti-Labour party and haven’t defined their territory, which means that others trample all over it. Voting Lib Dem has often been interpreted as a polite way of saying ‘I don’t really want to make any tough choices about what kind of government we have’; but it’s now time to step up and decide whether we as a society want a Labour or a Conservative government – and the only way to ensure either is to vote for it.