Blog to what extent your ward/SOA resembles a 'sustainable community' and what extent you don't think it does. Give some evidence from your observations (or your memories) of this judgment.



The town I live in is called Milton Keynes, the area is called Springfield, most people live in unshared bungalows or houses,which are detached or semi detached.1,418 out of 1,516 live in bungalows. A small number of people live in shared households, or flats. The number of people which live in each house hold is usually two people, which means they have allot of room, to live Comfortably. When it comes to occupation 149 out of 1,144 aged 16-74 people work in semi routine occupations, while another 20.44 percent work in lower managerial occupations. 44 percent work in higher managerial occupations. Allot of the people who live there are married couples with no dependent children .132 couples are also married with no dependent children, while 178 people live in one person house holds. The number of cohabiting couples is quite low at 38 percent. Loan parent house holds with dependent children is 42 percent, which is also quite low compaired to the figure for married couples.


When it come to education a high number of students aged 16-18 have a level three qualification,out of the 672.2 percentage 202.2 have a level three qualification. There are no figures for people who are living in medical care establishment, or children who are in care, so this probably shows that most people are healthy.

Overall I think Springfield is quite a sustainable environment, as it fulfills most of the aspects which make an area sustainable.The results show most people work and live in good quality housing with allot of space, and the level of education is quite good as a high number of students achieve good grades in their GCSE's.

The constituency in which you live
Your local MP (name, party)
The name of your local council
Which political party dominates your local council?


Milton Keynes is described as a new vibrant city, but actually it is a town which is modern with allot history. The city has many things to offer, such as a museums,architecture and even art. Milton Keynes has a great theatre, which is very successful, its productions range from musicals to opera, and they even do a pantomime every year. The shopining is also great the centre:Mk and Midsummer Place combine to make one of the largest covered shopping centres in Europe.

www.destinationmiltonkeynes.co.uk

Milton Keynes has two local MPs representing it one is Dr Phyllis Starkey who is with labour, she represents the south west of Milton Keynes. Mark Lancaster who is with the Conservatives, represents north east Milton Keynes. The city is divided into two constituencies, which means the city is divided into two parts north and south. My local council is called Milton Keynes council, it is governed by the Liberal Democrates, with the conservatives following closely by, Labour have the minority support.
http://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk


2010 is election year.
What is your attitude concerning people who are not planning to vote in the general election?
What main concerns do you have that may influence your vote?


I think it is very important for everyone who can vote to actually vote. If you are not happy with something I believe you should do something about it, in order to see a change. People who are not planning to vote should not complain, when the changes that they want to see do not take place, they should also examine the changes they want to see in this country, and ask if those changes are going to happen without them doing anything about it. There is a good chance that the Party you are voting for may not win but if you vote aleast you know you tried to make a difference, and the possiablity of a change will be more likely to take place.

So...what are your views? Is there really a transport problem? Do the benefits of motorized transport outweigh the costs? Are there any minor (or perhaps major) changes you personally feel could make our present transport system more sustainable?


There is no doubt that transport plays a very important factor in our everyday life. It is not just essential in for economic progress, but it has improved our quality of life. Transport enables the movement of both people and goods from one place to another.It makes life easier as it offers a great deal of choice, if for example your car breaks down you have other alternatives such as bus,or train.
Businesses have also benefited from transport a great deal as they are able to move their goods from one place to another. But despite all these benefits transport contributes significantly to carbon dioxide emissions, which is one of the green house gases contributing to climate change. Research done in 2006 has shown that transport was responsible for accumulating 24% which is approximately 130 million tonnes.Road transport accounted for 92%. This is really shocking and i think if we keep going this way there will be terrible consequences. The sad fact is something will probably only be done when it is too late, and we are forced to do something about the problem.
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/analysis.pdf

I think the transport system does need major changes, but I don't think they will take place any time soon, as the government will probably not be willing to spend allot of money on it. Maybe small changes need to be introduced first, like promoting a healthier life style to people, so that instead of driving they may decide to walk or ride a bike. Although a healthier life style is promoted i don't think that it is promoted enough. Transport also needs to go green, instead of petrol other planet friendly gases need to be used. This will help the environment and make life healthier

What do you think? Is Christmas sustainable? How would it all work in a changed world?

In my opinion Christmas is not sustainable as everything is done over the top. There are more lights more food more of everything, so therefore there is more waste.

This will probably never change as it is a time of celebration, when families who haven't seen each other for some time get the chance to see each other and come together to celebrate a religious tradition.

If it was all different and Christmas wasn't a time of celebration I think it would be really boring, as there would be nothing to look forward to. But I do think it needs to become more sustainable.For example People can use plastic trees instead of buying a new tree every year, and they can also cook less food as well as recycling the things which they use.

Here is a website to help you learn more about Christmas

http://www.soon.org.uk/christmas.htmwww.soon.org.uk/christmas.htm

To what extent do the best selling UK newspapers cover stories related to series issues? To what extent would you think that it is their role to do so? In your opinion does the tabloid media and low budget entrainment (reality shows, soaps) have too much power and influence in this country?

In the UK the best selling news paper is the sun. This newspaper doesn't cover serious issues very well, its purpose its to entertain and keep the public informed on celebrity gossip, like who is dating who, and who is rumoured to be breaking up. Even if they do print a series issues its not written in depths so you don't get the full picture on what happened. The target audience for the sun is 9 years old, so this is properly why they don't cover complex issues which are going on in the world.

Popular news papers such the Sun, and Star should make more of an effort to inform people of issues such as climate change as they have power to influence people. I understand they want to keep their topics interesting for their target audience, but they can present series issues in a way which will make the reader take notice. This is very important as series issues such as climate change affect all of us, and the more we are informed the better we will be prepared for changes.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/

I do believe the tabloid media, and low budget soaps have allot of power over people in this country. People are addicted to watching their favourite soaps like Easterners and Conaration Street, when they miss it you find them asking questions like what happened in Eastenders last night?. I think a change needs to take place to make people more aware of serious issues, maybe new program's need to be invented which are more to do with whats going in the world. But they need to be able to hold the interest of the viewers.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Watching the film has made me think about global warming in a different way. If I wouldn't have watched this film I wouldn't even question the fact that maybe its not happening.

The film contained allot of information about climate change, but I'm not quite sure if it was all true. It stated, the earths temperature rises and falls all the time. This has taken place in the medieval times, and in the ice age, but the world survived through this. So why wouldn't it be able to do this again.
Industrial growth was said to be a good thing in the film. After the second World War there was an economic boom, which means there were allot of cars, planes fridges etc invented. According to them global warming didn't increase during this time. They were trying to make the point that global warming is not caused by industrial progress, and campaigners for global warming are trying send us back to medieval times.
I'm not sure I agree with this because I think global warming takes time to develop. We wouldn't be able to see the effects straight away.
The point I agreed with the most is how the western world doesn't want to see Africa develop and grow. I think if they did they would have done more to help them. I didn't like the fact that Campaigners don't want them to use the coal and oil they already have, but solar power instead. Even though this is expensive and unreliable, they still insists on them using it. I think this is ridiculous because if the western world can use coal and oil why shouldn't Africa be able to use it as well.

An Inconvenient Truth

To what extent do you think this was deserved? Having watched this film in class did you feel that your opinion( or perhaps the opinion of other) to the issue of climate change could be positively influenced? What did you think of this film? Was it effective?

I m not quite sure if Al Gore deserved a Nobel Peace Price for the film because, although I found the film interesting, I think it wasn't amazing. It just simply high lighted an issue which we were all aware of. I mean I think he was funny and made it easy for people to warm to him, but I think it wasn't so remarkable that you would want to go out and rescue the planet.
I found the film interesting, and I think Al Gore did a great job in showing people the effects of climate change. I liked the way he made the audience see he was human too, by showing what happened to his son, and how this was the turning point for him. I also found him to be a great communicator, he was funny and relatable.
I think the film will positively influence people, because it uses real facts to show the effects of global warming. It shows that its a real problem that affects all of us and something has to be done.
The film added to my knowledge of climate change allot.It showed allot of interesting facts like when carbon dioxide is released it gets trapped and makes the earth warmer. This makes oceans warmer and this is why hurricanes and floods happen. Although this has been proven by scientists before, and warning signs have been given nothing was done. The film also showed that global warming sucks moisture out of the soil and this is what is happening in places like Dafur.
New diseases are also going to increase like the avion flu. Global warming means more species are going to be extinct such as polar bears who live in the arctic because the ice is melting.

The film added to my worries of climate change and it made me think something has to be done and it has to be now before its too late.

Here is a link which might be usefull
http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/