What’s left of Jim’s Union Jack flying over the allotments, showing the ravages of North Devon breezes.

Tonight’s homegrown pizza ingredients. Still a few red onions left; garlic will last through to February.

We’ve not yet started to make our own “mozzarella di bufala”.

It’s too easy to slip into the habit of posting landscapes, sunsets and other glib photos. What interests me now is the smaller things in life, sometimes overlooked but rich in details or character.

So, here’s a landscape instead.

In the dim and distant past, I had a photo blog. Simple task: post a photo every day. Sometimes the photos told a tale. Others were just things that struck my eye.

Well, I’m bored. So, here we go again.

Our local council, Torridge, is now collecting food waste separately. All food waste – even bones and grease – can be composted in a special digester.

We’ve now got a nice little caddy and corn starch bags to collect our food waste.

All very well, except we hardly create any food waste. As veggies, kitchen scraps go in our compost bin – no bones or animal fats. And, we rarely have anything left on our plates as we’re slightly fussy about portions and not buying food we’re not going to eat.

The amount we, as a nation, now waste is disheartening. The fact we now have to build digesters to process tons of waste that would normally sit on a landfill and create methane, a potent greenhouse gas, says a lot. Probably a function of how cheap our food has become; how lazy we are; and how we pay lip service to reducing our carbon footprints.

Into the new century, my mum still lived as though she lived in the austerity years of post-war Britain. For her waste, particularly food waste, was criminal. Much as her eccentricity became amusement for our family, her principles of waste minimisation – reduce, reuse and reuse again – were ahead of her time. Recycling won’t save the planet. Food waste collection encourages wasteful consumption. Reducing consumption is the only way forward.

Anyway, with two bins in the kitchen already, there’s no room for a third.

We have had worse storms since we moved here three years ago. Nevertheless, wind gusts overnight and this morning probably topped 50mph, possibly as high as 60. (Update: at 8.48 the wind seems to have picked up again.)

I’ve quickly checked the vulnerable garden and allotment bits and pieces. Oh, and the house is standing and not (I think) leaking.

• Greenhouse: okay
• Salad cloche: check, a bit battered, but holding
• Cabbage and broccoli netting: still standing
• Broad bean cloche: weighed down by rocks, hasn’t moved
• 20 foot eucalyptus: swaying but erect
• Back fence: ouch

Not that I need any more seeds, but I picked up some left over runner bean seeds on Sunday as I cleared the bean poles.

The pea poles came down too and grabbed 20 or seeds from the wreckage.

One of my collected broad beans has germinated. I sowed and planted out 18 in a rather soggy bed over the weekend.

Thank you for your letter of 28 October in reply to my email about the postcode database. I am grateful for your speedy response.

Your letter raises a number of points which I feel need to be addressed.

As far as I am aware, this issue is not before courts. Legal action by Royal Mail has forced the developers – ErnestMarples.com – to disable their service.

I am not suggesting placing restrictions upon Royal Mail. The issue here is releasing data which is of public interest. In this case, the developers wish to use the data for solely non-profit purposes with benefits for all citizens.

Any data held by or on behalf of public bodies should be treated as a public, not a commercial, asset. This is the case in the United States and other countries.

In the UK, you may be aware of the Cabinet Office initiative to make public data public. The Digital Engagement blog has further details:
http://blogs.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/digitalengagement/.

A number of local authorities – such as Lichfield DC – are also going down this road.

The government has asked Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the world wide web, to advise on the open data issue. I am encouraged that the Conservative party has also recognised the need for better digital engagement. In this respect, the appointment of MySociety’s Tom Steinberg as an advisor, though seen as controversial by some, is a positive step.

On the question of the postcode database, I do not see why Royal Mail’s overall profitability should determine treatment of public data, especially where it is being used on a non-profit basis and for public benefit.

You comment on the use of early day motions (EDMs). As a former civil servant who used to brief ministers on replying to EDMs, I am aware of the volume of motions that are tabled before the House of Commons. Whilst some EDMs may be viewed as frivolous, in many cases this is the only way to raise awareness of important local or national issues. What would you propose in place of EDMs?

As to the administration cost, again from my experience, I am sure this pales into insignificance compared with the costs of correspondence between MPs and government departments or answering parliamentary questions.

I hope you can support open access to public data, particularly the postcode database, irrespective of signing an EDM.

I would prefer any replies by email as this saves paper and taxpayers money.

Yours sincerely,

Peter McClymont

Letter from:

Geoffrey Cox Q.C., M.P for Torridge & West Devon

HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SW1A OAA
Wednesday 28th October 2009

Dear Mr McClymont,

Thank you for contacting me about use of the Royal Mail postcode database.

As I am sure you will appreciate, it is difficult for me to offer a detailed comment on an issue that is currently before the courts.

However, it is my understanding that whilst post code information is provided to Royal Mail by local authorities for free, the database itself is compiled and managed by Royal Mail employees, the cost of which is borne by the company.

The rights of the database are therefore owned as an asset by Royal Mail, and I am wary of proposals that would see the Government place additional restrictions on the use of such wholly owned assets by Royal Mail, particularly given the precarious financial state of the company.

As a result, I am reluctant to sign EDM 2000. Since my election I have come to regard Early Day Motions as a pointless absorption of valuable resources. They are seldom debated, rarely brought to a vote and require neither recognition nor response from the Government. They have aptly been described as “parliamentary graffiti” and it has also recently been disclosed that the annual cost of their administration is in excess of £627,000.

I therefore, no longer sign any EDMs, even those with which I sympathise. Thank you again for writing to me.

Yours sincerely,
Geoffrey Cox, Q.C., M.P.
Website: geoffreycox.co.uk

Email: tellgeoffrey@geoffreycox.co.uk

Cox’s letter (pdf 33 kB)