speed

There's a heavy campaign to prevent construction of the high speed railway between London and Birmingham. It has all-party support and is claimed to offer huge benefits to the economy, especially in the midlands. People who live in the environment of the route are deeply and properly upset, because this monstrous development will without doubt upset their lives, apart from tearing a gap through very pleasant countryside. Why do we need everything to be speeded up? In a nutshell, what's the rush? One of the great historic factors of British history is the numberof things that have happened to universal benefit which evolved slowly. Major medical, industrial and social improvements have been gradual, as we sampled, tested, experimented, rejected and started again, watching to see the outcome. What is the urgent need now to cut minutes of the travelling time between our first and second cities? What will travellers do with the time they save? Is it really worth the immense cost to achieve a little more time at the end of the journey? I do not believe that it is. I recall a movement to encourage slowness; it is needed more than ever. We need not be martyrs to ever greater speed, which is already increasing stress. Human beings were not built for the kind of acceleration which is endemic in today's lifetsyle. Courtesy thrives under three headings:  1 Listen,  2 smile, and 3 slow down.  Ian Gregory

bonus challenge

Re bonuses... There must surely be a fair number of people  working in banks, in the public and private sector, and in entertainment and sport whose ethical code is informed by their faith. So what do they do when their income - already adequate - is enhanced by bonuses and salary increases which take it beyond anything their lifestyle requires? There is a multi-million £ jackpot lying unused and un-needed in pockets, purses and balances: enough to meet all the immediate needs of the nation, including filling in the potholes. Christian ethics requires sensible restrictions on how much we need, on this side of extravagance. We can all eat, drink, keep warm, take holidays, educate children on, say, £75,000 a year  (There are thousands on that min) Anybody whose income from all sources exceeds this and does not give generously to those with proven need is living in opposition to the simple rules of every religious precept. A colleague says he told his congregation that there was enough money identified for a major £50,00 restoration project. That was the good news.The bad news was that it was still in their pockets. (My income, by the way, is a state pension , plus occasional funeral fees and a modest bequest. Our house is owned by our church, and we pay £90 a month management fee. We are rich!) Tonight we are having chicken and two veg and fruit pie. Our three children are happily married and a ten years old grandson has just arrived by bike for his tea.  Alleluia !