Can we call it corruption?

Can we call it corruption? When Russell Brand recently said on Newsnight to interviewer Jeremy Paxman that he didn't vote and he encouraged others not to either, his sentiments were taken to be an endorsement for the widespread political apathy that seems to exist in Britain today. Far from Brand being apathetic however, he is one of our more engaged political citizens. Often he articulates himself through humour and irreverence, but his key point, that politics has been hijacked by corporate power, is becoming more and more evident. Last year some 40,000 people died of alcoholism, this figure is a conservative estimate and does not include the suicides, accidents, murders, manslaughters and deaths through neglect that alcoholism causes. A million people were assaulted by those who were intoxicated with alcohol and the taxpayer forked out £12 billion to pay for the policemen, social workers, paramedics, street cleaners and doctors that treat the nationwide alcoholism epidemic that we are currently enduring. Overall the cost to our society is devastating, not simply in terms of lives lost and resources sacrificed, but in the damaging, alienating and estranging quality of mass public addiction. The sense that high streets and city centres are shared space that everyone can use has sadly diminished, and with it, many of the intangible bonds that draw us together. The government's response to this crisis revealed this week a great deal about the state of government in Britain. The British Medical Journal is the latest body to blow the whistle on this national scandal. Continuing moral cowardice on the subject of alcohol pricing has allowed ministers and top civil servants to be directly lobbied by spokesmen for the alcohol business no fewer than 130 times during deliberations on minimum alcohol pricing. Proposed legislation, backed by every major charity dealing with alcohol addiction, homelessness and mental health and professional health care body in the country, was inexplicably torpedoed by this government at the last minute. Why? Everyone knew at the time exactly why, it was not what Conan Doyle would have described in the Casebook of Sherlock Holmes as being 'a three pipe problem.' The reason why is that the interests of corporate power hold more sway in the corridors of power than evidence, logic and philanthropy. 40,000 deaths and £12 billion of waste every year cannot compete for a minister’s attention in the same way that 130 hours of professional lobbying can. Lest you think this is just a party political issue, consider where the last administration chose to hold the 2005 G8 summit in the UK. In this context it makes perfect sense for Brand and countless others not to vote, his argument that he is legitimating a system based on pure greed that supports alien and inhuman ways of thinking and being against the interests of the multitude seems entirely valid. Can we call it corruption? If not, then only because the unfettered access of divisive business interests to the highest levels of decision making has been legitimated long ago. The fact that no law has been broken here is in fact somehow worse, however; it means that our system of government and it's obeisance to corporate power is corrupted and morally bankrupt.

Sbwnjwyr

Yr wythnos hon, gwnaeth Cymdeithas Feddygol Prydain ei datganiad cliriaf a’r un fwyaf amserol hyd yn hyn ar fater argyfwng alcoholiaeth ym Mhrydain: "Yn yr hinsawdd economaidd bresennol, ni allwn fforddio parhau i wario miloedd ar filoedd o bunnau ar glirio ôl-effeithiau problem alcohol y dylai’r llywodraeth ddelio â hi gyda mwy o bwyslais ar fesurau ataliol." Mewn ffaith, mae’r pwysau y mae alcoholiaeth mas yn ei roi ar y GIG yn anghynaladwy ac mae’n gwthio ein hysbytai i dorbwynt ac mae’r sefydliad meddygol yn gwybod hyn yn dda. Mae’r llywodraeth yn gwybod hynny hefyd, fel y diwydiant alcohol - y mwyaf pwerus o’r ddwy lobi a’r un yr oedd y llywodraeth yn dewis ei gefnogi. Yr wythnos hon, roedd y BMA yn galw unwaith eto am leiafswm pris ar alcohol, strategaeth a brofwyd fel un i ostwng y nifer o gleifion cysylltiedig ag alcohol sy’n cael eu derbyn i ysbytai yn yr Alban ac ‘yn ymosod ar arferion marchnata anghyfrifol’. (Pan ystyrir bod alcohol, fel arfer, ar frig y mynegai sy’n achosi fwyaf o niwed, yn achosi miliwn o ymosodiadau bob blwyddyn, yn gysylltiedig â’r mwyafrif o achosion o gam-drin ac esgeuluso plant ac sy’n gweld pumed ran o bedwar deg rywbeth yn cael eu derbyn i wardiau argyfwng bob blwyddyn, nid yw’n rhy ddadleuol i awgrymu bod yr holl arferion marchnata’n anghyfrifol). Y rheswm dros bryder y BMA oedd yr ystadegau brawychus a ryddhawyd ac a oedd yn dangos epidemig o ddibyniaeth mewn pobl rhwng 40-50 oed; mae yfwyr pyliau’n rhoi baich o ryw £22 miliwn y flwyddyn ar y GIG ond mae yfwyr cartref yn eu 40au yn mynychu ysbytai mor aml fel eu bod yn draenio £670 miliwn o’r coffrau cyhoeddus. Mae meddwl am bethau yn nhermau ariannol, wrth gwrs, yn ddadlennol ac mae’n ddefnyddiol wrth roi awgrym i ni o raddfa’r broblem (un sy’n 30 gwaith y maint) ond ni ddylem adael i’r gost hon ein pellhau oddi wrth y bobl hynny ynghanol y drasiedi hon. Mae canran fwyaf dioddefwyr y diwydiant alcohol yn dlawd, bron i 40 y cant o deuluoedd incwm isel ac mae’r mwyafrif yn ymddangos fel yfwyr cartref, sy’n gallu mwynhau eu dibyniaeth i ffwrdd oddi wrth heriau sefyllfaoedd cymdeithasol. Yn y cyfnod hwn o lymder, pan mae nawdd i lyfrgelloedd, canolfannau chwaraeon a bysiau’n cael eu torri, yn rhyfedd iawn, mae’r diwydiant alcohol fel petai’n cael ei eithrio o fesurau tynhau o’r fath ac mae ganddo un system ariannu anferth gan y trethdalwyr i gynorthwyo ei waith; y GIG. Mae’r mwyafrif o fusnesau sy’n creu cynnyrch gwastraff niweidiol er mwyn elw neu sy’n llygru, yn gorfod glanhau’r llanastr neu’n gorfod talu’r trethi gwyrdd i dalu am eu heffaith ar yr amgylchedd, ond nid y diwydiant alcohol. Cost y gollyngiad olew Deepwater Horizon oedd 11 bywyd a thua $50bn i BP. Pa bris y miloedd o fywydau sy’n cael eu colli bob blwyddyn ym Mhrydain oherwydd cam-drin alcohol? Mae’r diwydiant alcohol yn preifateiddio’r elw o’u gweithgareddau ac yn cymdeithasu’r gost i’r gweddill ohonom ei thalu, yn ariannol ac yn ysbrydol. Petai’r diwydiant alcohol yn gorfod talu ei ffordd am unwaith a chyfrannu at y niwed mae’n ei achosi, byddai’n methu - mae hyn yn arwydd bod costau alcohol yn llawer mwy na’r budd a geir i fusnesau preifat neu i gymdeithas.

Freeloaders

This week the British Medical Association made its clearest and most timely statement to date on the issue of Britain's alcoholism crisis: "We cannot afford to keep spending millions of pounds in today's economic climate on mopping up the after-effects of an alcohol problem that the government should tackle with a greater emphasis on preventive measures." In essence, the burden that mass alcoholism is placing on the NHS is unsustainable and is pushing our hospitals to breaking point and the medical establishment knows this full well. The government knows it too, as does the alcohol industry - the more powerful of the two lobbies and the one the government chose to back. This week the BMA called once again for minimum pricing on alcohol, a strategy proven to reduce alcohol related hospital admissions in Scotland and a 'crackdown on irresponsible marketing practices' (when one considers that alcohol is normally at the top of most harm indices, causes a million assaults per year, is connected to most cases of child abuse and neglect and sees a fifth of forty somethings admitted to the emergency wards annually, it's not too controversial to suggest that all marketing practices are irresponsible). The reason for the BMA's concern were the shocking statistics released that show an addiction epidemic amongst 40-50 year olds; town centre binge drinkers place a burden of some £22 million a year on the NHS, but home drinkers in their 40's attend hospital so frequently that they drain £670 million from the public coffers. Thinking about things in financial terms is of course revealing and it is useful in giving us a clue to the scale of the problem (one that is 30 times the size), but we should not let these costings distance us from the human beings at the centre of this tragedy. The largest percentile of victims of the alcohol industry are poor, nearly 40 percent come from low income brackets and most appear to be home drinkers, able to engage in their addiction away from the challenges of social situations. In this time of austerity, when public subsidies for libraries, sports centres and buses are being cut, the alcohol industry curiously seems to be exempt from such belt tightening measures and still has one enormous tax-payer funded system to assist its operations; the NHS. Most businesses that generate harmful waste products in the pursuit of profit or who pollute are legally obliged to clean up their messes or are levied green taxes to pay for their impact on the environment, not the drinks industry though. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill cost 11 lives and about $50bn for BP. What price the thousands of lives lost each year in Britain to alcohol abuse? The alcohol industry privatises the profits from their activities and socialises the costs for the rest of us to pay, financially and spiritually. If the alcohol industry were ever forced to pay its way and to contribute to paying for the damage it caused it would collapse, an indication that the costs of alcohol far outweigh the benefits accrued to private business or society. Wynford Ellis Owen CEO Living Room Cardiff

We're all perfectly imperfect

Last week the global news media was fixated with the story of Brian Jones, a bus driver from Solihull who was dismissed from his job after it was revealed he had taken crack cocaine, was drunk at the wheel and clearly had sex addiction issues due to his frequent use of prostitutes. At the same time an obscure bank clerk from Reading, Mrs Andrea Smith, revealed that she had bought cocaine and enjoyed a weekend bender in Manchester. Except it wasn’t. These two fictional stories are composites of real ones, stories of ordinary men and women whose lives are wrecked by addiction, day in day out. The narrative of fall from grace, disgrace and public shaming is too commonplace, too mundane, too familiar and everyday for the newspapers, TV and internet to bother publicising, except when a high profile politician or public figure is involved. The Mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford, has given the media some wonderful material to work with, appearing at once to be both a buffoon and psychopath and even worse, publicly funded but, in many ways, the story of his British counterpart Paul Flowers is even more perfect for the tabloid press. Mr. Flowers, former Chairman of the Cooperative Bank, has had to resign and face police investigation after it was revealed that during his tenure at the loss making bank he was purchasing cocaine and other substances. He was not only a Methodist Minister, but the trustee of a drugs charity, and in the eyes of our ever judgmental media (who are, as a profession beyond reproach in matters of substance abuse of course), a cardinal sin has been committed. Mr. Flowers was no doubt meant to occupy some saintly position, untainted by addiction, the title of minister conferred unto him seems also to have come with the presumption by everyone else of infallibility. The suggestion is also implicit from news reports that have circulated about his fall from grace that the Cooperative Bank would be operating at a profit were it not for his nefarious vices. Maybe it would, it’s almost impossible to say for sure, but the reason for this letter is not so much about either Ford or Flowers, but our collective response of surprise and shock when we learn that the rich and powerful are out of control. When we see other lives out of control such as city centre street drinkers, most of us barely register their presence, but they are every bit as human and in distress as the damaged people who all too often have access to the levers of power. It is understandably difficult to extend our human compassion and understanding to the most vulnerable and damaged victims of addiction who we encounter on a day to day basis, but equally it becomes increasingly challenging to show compassion to high profile victims too. Despite their disagreeable antics in high office, both men Ford and Flowers are as human, as flawed, as likely to feel sorrow and loneliness as the rest of us; both men are very ill with addiction and completely lost, having to make sense of a whirlwind of chaos in the full glare of the media spotlight. We have come to assume that our leaders are less human than us, that these wizards of public affairs, finance and administration can work some special kind of magic that we mortals are not privy to, and our societies will continue to function in a generally normal and secure way. What these two examples suggest is that within the corridors of political, financial and bureaucratic power, there are probably as many damaged, addicted, frightened and lonely people as there are within the population at large. We therefore need more than ever to have a frank and honest open discussion about addiction in our society, one that transcends our tabloids, taboos, secrets and shame.

Dawn Berry

Come Dine with me is a programme ostensibly about modern manners and the nation’s eating and entertaining habits, but as with all reality TV, it is unscripted, relies on real people as opposed to actors in order to entertain the public and takes place in people’s homes. The show is enormously popular and has reached the level of cult viewing, largely because it’s researchers pick entertaining characters with forthright views, occasionally boorish tendencies and an eccentric take on what it means to be a host. One of the contestants, Dawn Barry, was voted the best ever contestant of the show because of her erratic behaviour; Dawn killed herself last week aged 38, following a long battle with alcoholism, an addiction that was on display for the world to see on prime time TV. What was it about Dawn that elicited such affection or approval from the audience of Come Dine With Me? When she appeared on the show, she passed out at her own dinner party, went to bed and left the guests to make the food themselves, behaviour that obviously seems to have been entertaining to viewers who were unaware of her illness. Dawn had been desperate to become famous and well known, she had appeared on ITV’s Blind Date and a reality TV show about club reps and appearing on Come Dine With me finally secured recognition in the public eye. What of the production company ITV Studios? They have made over 1,200 editions of the programme and surely are not inexperienced when dealing with the general public and their various needs and problems. The viewing public may not have been aware that Dawn’s erratic behaviour was the result of her drinking, but it would have been virtually impossible for the production company not to have been aware. Was the opportunity to make ‘good TV’ just too alluring? If so then ITV Studios have some soul searching to do. Dawn Barry’s life was not something for bored daytime TV watchers to gawp at, she was a desperately sad and lonely person who had experienced, courtesy of alcohol, drink drive bans and domestic violence. Last week she showed the world that the pain of addiction was too much to bear and she joined the 40,000 people who will die this year from drinking. Most of the time, alcoholics are invisible, they are an either embarrassment or they force the rest of society to confront some awkward questions, and when they aren’t invisible they are either celebrated as folk heroes like George Best or thanked for giving the rest of us a good laugh, like Dawn Barry. Dawn appeared on ‘reality’ TV, but almost no one saw the reality of her life at all, and if there was even a shred of courageous and pioneering TV that focused on addiction in the UK, people who suffer from the illness might become real and understood, not clownish caricatures who’s actual tears are shed away from the camera.

CAIS and Living Room Cardiff embark on new phase in their development 8th October 2013 CAIS and Living Room Cardiff embark on new phase in their development Following a meeting of its trustees, Living Room Cardiff, the major community-based recovery centre for Cardiff and south Wales, has agreed to merge with north Wales-based CAIS Drug and Rehabilitation North Wales and Powys to create one of Wales’ largest addiction therapy providers. Living Room Cardiff, which was first established in 2011, will become a part of the CAIS charity and will remain at its Cardiff location under the stewardship of its Chief Executive, Wynford Ellis Owen. CAIS is a registered charity and leading voluntary sector provider of personal support services in Wales. It helps people who are having problems with addictions, mental health, personal development and employment - as well as offering assistance and information to their families and friends. Its wide range of services includes residential treatment and rehabilitation, counselling, peer mentoring, supporting people in their homes, assisting people back into work or education, group work and other motivational interventions. The Living Room Cardiff has an ‘all addictions’ approach and welcomes anyone who needs support in taking that first step towards recovery or wanting to maintain their on- going recovery. The Living Room Cardiff also welcomes and provides advice and support for family members, partners and friends of people who have been affected by these addictions. Clive Wolfendale, CAIS Chief Executive said, “We are delighted to be working with the Living Room under this merger agreement. We share a very similar vision and ethos. Most of all, I believe together we can bring real energy and creativity to the cause of rehabilitation in Wales.” Wynford Ellis Owen, added, “This is an exciting day for the Living Room Cardiff. It provides us with a solid platform to move forward and deliver our groundbreaking approach to recovery treatment, but also by joining forces with CAIS we can both work together, each with its own remit, to tackle the growing problem of addiction on an all-Wales basis for the first time. “The new structure enables us to build on our successes over the past few years and help even more people to recover from addiction and rebuild normal, productive lifestyles, in the belief that people can and do change.” ENDS For further information please contact Rhodri Ellis Owen at Cambrensis Communications on 029 20 257075 or Rhodri@cambrensis.uk.com 8 Hydref 2013 CAIS a Stafell Fyw Caerdydd yn cychwyn ar gyfnod newydd yn eu datblygiad Yn dilyn cyfarfod o’i ymddiriedolwyr, mae Stafell Fyw Caerdydd, y ganolfan adferiad gymunedol ar gyfer Caerdydd a De Cymru, wedi cytuno i gyfuno gyda CAIS y mudiad cyffuriau ac adferiad yng Ngogledd Cymru a Phowys i greu un o ddarparwyr therapi mwyaf ar gyfer dibyniaeth yng Nghymru. Bydd Stafell Fyw Caerdydd, a gafodd ei sefydlu yn 2011, yn dod yn rhan o’r elusen CAIS a bydd yn parhau yn ei leoliad bresennol yng Nghaerdydd o dan arweiniad ei brif weithredwr, Wynford Ellis Owen. Mae CAIS yn elusen gofrestredig ac yn arwain yn y maes o ddarparu gwasanaethau cymorth personol yng Nghymru. Mae’n helpu pobl sy’n cael problemau gyda dibyniaeth, iechyd meddwl, datblygiad personol a gwaith – yn ogystal â chynnig cymorth a gwybodaeth i’w teuluoedd a’u ffrindiau. Mae ei ystod eang o wasanaethau yn cynnwys triniaethau preswyl, cynghori, mentora gan gyfoedion, cefnogi pobl yn eu cartrefi, helpu pobl ddychwelyd i fyd gwaith neu addysg, gwaith grŵp, ynghyd â mathau eraill o annogaeth cefnogol personol. Mae Stafell Fyw Caerdydd yn trin â phob math o ddibyniaeth ac yn croesawu unrhyw un sydd angen cymorth naill ai i gymryd y cam cyntaf tuag at adferiad neu sydd eisiau help i gynnal eu hadferiad. Mae Stafell Fyw Caerdydd hefyd yn croesawu ac yn cynnig cyngor a chefnogaeth i deulu, partneriaid a ffrindiau pobl sy’n dioddef o ddibyniaeth. Dywedodd Clive Wolfendale, Prif Weithredwr CAIS, “Rydyn yn hynod o falch i gyd-weithio gyda Stafell Fyw Caerdydd ar y cytundeb cyfuno hwn. Rydyn yn rhannu gweledigaeth ac ethos tebyg iawn. Yn fwy pwysig fyth, rwy’n credu y gallwn, gyda’n gilydd, ddod ag egni a chreadigrwydd gwirioneddol i achos adferiad yng Nghymru.” Ychwanegodd Wynford Ellis Owen, “ Mae’n ddiwrnod cyffrous i Stafell Fyw Caerdydd. Mae’n rhoi sylfaen gref i ni i symud ymlaen i ddarparu ein harddull torri tir newydd ni o drin adferiad. Hefyd drwy gyfuno gyda CAIS gallwn gydweithio, gyda’n gorchwylion ein hunain, i fynd i’r afael â’r broblem gynhyddol o ddibyniaeth am y tro cyntaf ar draws Cymru yn ei chyfanrwydd. “Mae’r strwythur newydd yn ein galluogi i adeiladu ar ein llwyddiannau dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf ac yn helpu hyd yn oed mwy o bobl i adfer o ddibyniaeth ac ail-adeiladu bywydau normal a chynhyrchiol, yn y gred fod pobl yn gallu ac yn llwyddo i newid.” DIWEDD Am wybodaeth bellach cysylltwch â Rhodri Ellis Owen yn Cambrensis Cyf ar 029 20 257075 neu Rhodri@cambrensis.uk.com

Paying the social and emotional price

As crude and grotesque displays go, one has to search far and wide to find a more blatant example than the recent rise of the pop starlet Miley Cyrus. The former Disney favourite has reinvented herself as a hyper sexualised and sexually available young woman and has done so at the expense of young women everywhere and modern culture at large. The purpose of this letter is not to tut at pop music or to enact a prudish or puritanical stance, sex and the popular song have been closely related since Ivor Novello penned his first tunes here in Cardiff a century ago. The reason why the Welsh Council on Alcohol and Other Drugs takes a position on this is because the wider culture that generates such banality is also responsible for immense emotional harm and dysfunction. It has long been understood that the simplistic notions of how people interact with role models that were dreamt up decades ago no longer apply, young people don’t simply absorb and directly emulate the actions of role models, it is in fact far more complex. When we see images of those who society and the media have validated by declaring them famous or celebrities we unconsciously take on the values that they seem to represent and of course for most of us the ‘ideals’ they represent are largely unobtainable. For those that can live up to what they are presented with a different problem exists, which is that of adopting the artifice (a tricky enough job for the celebrity, Norma Jean Baker, AKA Marilyn Monroe would frequently refer to the persona of Marilyn as ‘her’). We, as a society, encourage through subtle, silent and unconscious cues our young people to be something they are not. Our TV, internet and advertising creates a constant sense of lack, a constant sense of not-good-enough, and the reach of these messages increases year on year. When young people do act out these hyper sexualised roles they inevitably pay some social or emotional price, but the biggest of all is an alienation from self. So little is done in our society to encourage young people to develop and authentic and positive sense of who they are that pretense eventually becomes an accepted default setting and the burden of holding up this make believe for many becomes unbearable, resulting in the retreat to drugs, drink and other dysfunctional behaviours to numb the hurt. The fame of a few is bought at the price of the loneliness and confusion of the many and we as a society must try to engage in a meaningful discussion about how we engage our young in an exploration and appreciation of themselves, not the animated adverts for dysfunction they see on the screen.