But, I'm getting older and fatter. Although I'm a vegetarian and have a fairly healthy diet, it was becoming clear that wheezing after climbing a few flight of stairs isn't a viable long term strategy.

I have, at various times, tried going to a gym. The problem is, they're just so boring. Thunking away on an expensive piece of equipment is dull. It's too noisy to listen to a podcast and too shaky to read an ebook. I can't stand being bored - so I stopped going.

I then tried using both the Wii and Kinnect as part of a fitness regime. The results were mixed. With the Wii the games were moderately fun - but the controller is so imprecise that you don't really know if you're doing anything right. With the Kinnect the games were really fun - but you need a really large room in order to take advantage of them. And I only have a moderately sized one.

With both, you're relying on personal discipline to keep yourself active. There's no penalty for not carrying on. Well, ok, I wasted a couple of hundred quid on an Xbox 360 that I rarely use - but even that is cheaper than going to the gym!

So, hating exercise, lacking personal discipline, unwilling to throw money at a gym. What's a boy to do?

Then, I remembered... Way back in 1999 when I was studying in Ottawa, I used to practice Jiu Jitsu. Until a short illness knocked me out of commission, I had really enjoyed the study of martial arts. Perhaps that was what I needed.

As it happens, there are quite a few martial arts classes in Woking. I settled on Pil Sung Do. Why? The classes are on when I work from home and the location is a five minute walk from my house. Laziness wins again! I figured if I couldn't walk half a mile when I'd been sat on my arse all day - there was no hope for me.

So, I went along for a free trial lesson and was hooked!

I don't know much about martial arts, so I'll let the website explain what it's like

Pil Sung Do, meaning "The Art of Certain Victory" is a unique martial art based on modern scientific principles from human anatomy, physiology, kinesiology, neurophysiology and bio-mechanics.

Essentially lots of spinning, twisting, punching, kicking, and breathing. It looks a little like this:

One of the nice things about PSD is that the classes are mixed - in terms of ability, age, gender. So there are plenty of people starting out, and it's not just angry, sweaty blokes. Children are also welcome which is both hilarious (like having Ewoks unleash their fury on you) and terrifying (how can a kid kick that high?).

I think what appeals to me about learning a martial art is that it's the antithesis of exercise. Every lesson is just that - a lesson. I feel like I am continually learning. My mind is being stretched as much as my tendons.

I'm not into the quantified self - so I'm not measuring my weight, girth, or anything like that. All I know is that three times a week I'm sweating buckets and feeling like my chest is going to explode. But, crucially, every week I'm doing slightly more than the week before.

My muscles feel stronger - and I can definitely stretch further than I used to. I'm even breathing more. A large part of PSD is breathing correctly - it's odd having a Grand Master remind you to breathe; surely it's the most natural thing in the world? But more and more I'm noticing that I'm holding my breath or only taking shallow breath even when exercising vigorously.

Breathing, drinking water, counting in Korean, stretching, learning, thinking, and occasionally punching things Very Hard Indeed. I could get used to this.

필승

The first lesson was a great success. It was held before the Christmas break - so I was eager to make sure that interest hadn't waned. Far from it - we were over subscribed!

We had 10 PCs and 12 kids - which lead to some sharing of equipment. Everyone involved seemed to enjoy it (including me) - so I thought it would be worthwhile to make some general notes which I hope may be of use to other instructors.

• Girls like coding! Around a third of participants were mini-LadyGeeks. The CodeClub plans are suitable for boys and girls.


• Sharing a PC sucks. I don't know if it's better to exclude kids who turn up late, or make them do "pair programming" - but it's harder to learn if one person is doing the work and one is an onlooker.


• Make sure you have all your handouts ready. Due to a printer mishap, we had to share some worksheets - that's not great when kids are working at different speeds.


• Scatch is very simple. Which means the enterprising child can find half a dozen ways to make it misbehave! With 10 children clamouring for attention, it can be hard to spot where the bug is. Sometimes it's best to say "Delete everything, start again, and follow the instructions really carefully!"


• Some kids finish early and want to be stretched. You can either give them the advanced assignments (add more monsters, change their colours, etc) or you can deputise them into classroom assistants. Guess which option I chose!


• Kids can be really creative - both in terms of the customisations they build and the questions they ask. I'll never forget how a little girl with an Alice band asked me "How can I make the monster drip with blood and then have its head explode when I click on it?"


• Parents can be a hindrance. Remember when you got a train set for your birthday and your dad "helped" you by putting it all together, breaking it, and then claiming it wasn't his fault that you weren't enjoying it? Any kids who can use a mouse can probably get by without parental help.


• That said, having parents view the child's work at the end of the lesson is really encouraging. It lets the parent know what their kid has been doing and it gives the kid a chance to show off.


• Have a memory stick for each participant to save their work on. Thanks to Telefonica (my employer, I'm not speaking for them, may contain nuts, etc.) I was able to give a flash drive to each kid. I put on a copy of Scratch for Linux, Mac, and Windows - along with some other programming resources. Not every kid will have a computer at home, but Scratch will quite happily run from a memory stick on a school or library machine.


• Use headphones if the program needs sound. It stops the kids from getting distracted by hearing the noises eminating from their friends' PCs. In a library setting, it stops you getting glared at.


• Have helpers. I'm enormously grateful to the staff of Woking Library who have been helping me. Dealing with ten excitable children is slightly more complex than I imagined!

...and all that's just from two sessions! Wonder what the next will bring?

If you want to help young people learn how to program computers, you can download Scratch for free - and register with CodeClub to get their lesson plans.

Adam Cohen-Rose

@adamcohenrose

hey @edent Surrey Library Service in Woking is looking for a @CodeClub volunteer… know anyone? codeclub.org.uk/getting-starte…

---

So, after a few months of negotiations, demonstrations, CRB checks, and consultations - I'm now ready to run a pilot programme at Woking Library.

Although I've written a few short stories about learning Python, this class will be entirely taught using Scratch.

It's been quite fun learning a new programming language. I really appreciate how simple the drag-and-drop interface is. It's also great that the language runs on Linux, Mac, and Windows. More importantly, it can be run from a USB stick - so the locked down machines of the library will have no problems running it.

I've written a demo game, learned most of what Scratch can do, and loaded up a dozen USB sticks with Scratch and other resources. Now all I need is for some kids to come along so I can fill their brains with a love of coding!

If you're interested in running a club at your school, or want to volunteer, visit www.codeclub.org.uk

A few days ago I entered into a discussion with him online about the issue. He has since deleted the tweets. But, as we know, the Internet has a long memory - so here they are. I've reordered a few to make our conversation clearer. None of my tweets have been deleted.

It started when I saw him talking about Lords reform.

<https://twitter.com/CllrCarlThomson/status/224956920946110464>

As far as I am aware, local councillors have very little impact on the subject. Of greater concern to this resident is the religious discrimination promoted by him and the Tory council. I asked about it, and got a very curt reply.

Suddenly, Carl sent this rather passive aggressive tweet. (NB due to GMT/BST this next tweet was sent 15 minutes after the previous one.)

https://twitter.com/CllrCarlThomson/status/224968730021593089

I couldn't see anyone accusing him of corruption, certainly not me. I can't even imagine why he bought it up.

Terence Eden is on Mastodon

@edent

@CllrCarlThomson I don't think you're corrupt. But shouldn't elected officials try to reflect to wishes of their constituents?

---

Terence Eden is on Mastodon

@edent

@CllrCarlThomson but what I don't get: majority of churchgoers said reintroduced fees wouldn't stop them attending. So who do you represent?

---

Terence Eden is on Mastodon

@edent

@CllrCarlThomson it would be a pretty daft form of corruption if you *were* taking advantage of free church parking. Tens of £ per year! :-)

---

Terence Eden is on Mastodon

@edent

@CllrCarlThomson no car? The perfect crime ;-)

---

And that's the sum of it. It baffles me why he has deleted the tweets. Sure, he was slightly rude to start with - but given the late hour it's not the worst of crimes. I'm no Paxman, so I can't imagine my questions taxed him - although, like Paxo, I never received an adequate reply.

In the meantime, Woking continues pouring away money to religious groups who neither need nor want subsidising. But that's a subject for another blog post...

The total subsidy was at least £55,864 between 2009 and 2011, and is still rising.

The National Secular Society took issue with this and, unsurprisingly, complained that this was blatant discrimination.

Not everyone agrees; Carl Thomson, one of my local councillors, rather missed the point when he talked about secular intolerance.

I was always disappointed that the threat of legal action had been made and think most people would see that as bullying and intolerant. The council gives concessions and grants to a range of organisations. The National Secular Society are crying discrimination where none exists.

Secularism means different things to different people. To me it has a simple meaning: the government has no business imposing religious beliefs on its citizens, nor should it restrict the religious beliefs, and no one religion should get special favours.

As a non-religious person, I really don't care how you spend your Sundays (or whichever day is special to you). I shouldn't be able to push my non-belief on you, and you shouldn't try to push your belief on me. We'll then get along fabulously!

But why should Christians get free parking? The assorted Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, Scientologists, Pastafarians, and Buddhists receive no such special dispensation for parking. Nor do the non-religious.

How We Got In This Mess

This situation has a fairly simple history. I recommend reading the whole report, but here are the highlights.

• Car parking in Woking used to be free on a Sunday.
• The council decided to charge for Sunday parking (Around 2001).
• Churches near the town centre asked the council to subsidise their worshippers (2003).
• The council did so.
• A Freedom of Information request was made which uncovered the subsidy (July / August 2011).
• The National Secular Society raised an official complaint (September 2011).

It seems to me that this is blatant discrimination. No other religions receive special subsidies for car parking.

As well as annoying the non-religious, it's also not a very good solution - especially for disabled church-goers.

The report states:

The EqIA has found that the current practice of allowing worshippers to park free on Sunday’s was implemented as a reactive practice, and did not consider the needs of the wider community. The practice does not impact positively on all churchgoers as it has a negative impact on disabled Woking residents within the faith community who are excluded from its benefits, and on the wider community of residents, including disabled people who are also excluded from its benefits.

What's even more astonishing is that this subsidy isn't needed!

... the vast majority of worshippers stated during the EqIA consultation that a reintroduction of charges would not prevent them from attending the Sunday church service

Even if "vast majority" just means just 51%, that would be a huge reduction in the bill to tax-payers.

At which point, perhaps it would be low enough for the church - or its members - to subsidise the member of its community who cannot afford the parking.

I'm not religious, and I understand why the faithful would think that it's disrespectful of me to compare "free parking for shopping" to "free parking for worship". But not all faiths choose Sunday as their day of observance.

The Muslim members of the Mosque on Portugal Road, close to the Town Centre, pay for on street parking from 12.00noon to 2.30pm on a Friday which is their day of religious observance.

Now, as far as I can tell, there has always been a charge for parking in the week - so this isn't a new form of discrimination against Muslims.

Local Councillor Carl Thomson, quoted in getSurrey said:

The religious community bring so much to Woking and it’s nice for the council to do something for worshippers.

But at no point, as far as I can tell, did Woking Council ever consider subsidising non-Christians - even though it would have an equally beneficial impact on those worshippers.

To quote the full report once again:

At the same time, it was seen as unfair in a multi-cultural society if similar concessions or relaxation of the rules were not also made for faith groups whose day of religious observance was not a Sunday. This is vividly illustrated by the fact that Christ Church, one of the churches that benefits from the free Sunday parking practice is approximately 150 yards from the Portugal Road Mosque. [emphasis added]

Recommendations

The report's recommendations are fairly straightforward:

It is recommended that:
1. WBC addresses the current arrangements in relation to disabled people and Sunday parking as a matter of urgency by taking up the issue in relation to the on-street parking bays as a matter of urgency.
2. That WBC continue with the practice of allowing worshippers to park free if the Council is able to determine that it is a 'proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim' and having had proper regard to all of the issues raised in this EqIA.
Or
3. WBC rescind Sunday car parking charges for all visitors to the Town Centre between the hours of 7.00am and 1.00pm.
Or
4. WBC rescind Sunday parking charges for all visitors to Woking town centre on Sundays.

I think that they are missing another, more practical, option. Keep charging for Sunday parking for everyone.

My Thoughts

At best, this policy was a well intentioned way to provide financial relief to those unable to pay for car parking. In practice, however, this is a divisive and discriminatory practice which leaves no one particularly satisfied.

I would hope that everyone can agree that preventing disabled people from parking (whether religious or not) is an issue which needs tackling.

So, finally we come to the heart of the matter: is it discrimination to give free parking to a select group of Christians?

As a secularist, I would argue that, yes, it is discrimination.

This can't be solved by giving all other religious people a free car parking pass on their day of worship. On a mercenary level, it would be financially crippling for the tax payers of Woking. On a practical level, how do you prevent people from saying they're worshipping when really they're doing the weekly shop?

Returning to the status quo of free Sunday parking would be a universal benefit - church-goers can worship if they want to, while the rest of us can go shopping, see a play or movie, or use the leisure centre.

But this could be seen to be indirect discrimination. Muslims worship on a Friday and Jews worship on a Saturday - so they are excluded from this benefit.

It would appear, from the report that the introduction of Sunday parking charges had "no impact on the footfall within the Town Centre".

The choice, to me, seems obvious. Sunday charging should remain. If religious institutions (of any flavour) want their worshippers to park for free, they should provide the subsidies themselves.

That way no one religion is favoured and the non-religious aren't subsidising those who don't need the money.

The Councillor's Reaction

I emailed Carl Thomson my concerns and, with his permission, present his reply in full:

Dear Terence,

Thank you for your email and your messages on Twitter about parking concessions for churchgoers.

I don't believe the current policy is discriminatory since it is not targeted at any particular religion. The legal advice we have received confirms that it is a legitimate aim for the council to support the religious and churchgoing community, in a similar manner to other social, religious and community groups who receive assistance through the award of grants and financial support.

Using your line of thinking, it could be argued that the council is discriminating against young people by giving financial support to the Marjorie Richardson Centre, that assistance to Outline discriminates against those who are not gay or lesbian, that allowing Street Angels to use council facilities discriminates against those who do not go out drinking on a Friday and Saturday night , and that giving a grant to the Pakistani Muslim Welfare Association discriminates against people who are neither Pakistani, Muslim, nor in need of assistance.

The reality is that we all benefit from the rich diversity of communities that exist in Woking and I would see the policy on free town centre parking for churchgoers as part of the broader range of support that the council provides to different people and organisations. I don't believe it causes resentment. Apart from the person who made the original complaint, you are the first person to raise the issue directly with me.

Regarding the National Secular Society, I have no problem with them campaigning to make sure the state does not interfere in matters of conscious or religion. What I take issue with is the threat of legal action to challenge any recognition or support for religious communities. In my view, the actions of the NSS are aimed not at ensuring protection from the state for people of all religions or none, but at removing any assistance given to Christians by local authorities - and it does appear to be mainly Christians that they target. As far as I am concerned, the NSS falls on the wrong side of the divide between legitimate campaigning and bullying.

I hope that answers your questions, although I suspect we may have to agree to disagree, but please feel free to publish this email on your blog.

Kind regards,

Carl

I completely agree that a diverse community is great for Woking. And I have no issue with supporting specific groups (monetarily or otherwise).

Refusing to fund a group because they were gay would be discrimination. Similarly only offering support to gay groups would also be discrimination. That's what we're seeing here - Woking Council are offering a specific benefit to one group of church-goers and denying it to those of other religions (or none). There is obviously a demand for it and - whether intentional or not - Woking are discriminating.

I'd like to take issue with four of the points which Carl makes.

• "I don't believe the current policy is discriminatory since it is not targeted at any particular religion."
  Well, this is simply not the case. Only Christians of a specific denomination can get free carparking on a Sunday.
• "I don't believe it causes resentment."
  The report clearly states

  ... it was seen as unfair in a multi-cultural society if similar concessions or relaxation of the rules were not also made for faith groups whose day of religious observance was not a Sunday.

  and, later,

  some residents have expressed their frustration at the practice of allowing Sunday worshippers to park free of charge whatever their income level, whilst other non church going residents, including those who fall within groups with other protected characteristics, cannot benefit from free parking, and are paying substantially increased charges across the board. This is seen as tantamount to being discriminated against on the grounds of having no belief or organised religious belief.

• "What I take issue with is the threat of legal action to challenge any recognition or support for religious communities."
  The NSS are concerned that the support is illegal - a view broadly supported by the report. What else can someone do to compel an organisation to follow the law other than threaten legal action? To just say "we think you're breaking the law, but we don't intend to do anything about it," is tantamount to condoning the law breaking.
• "the actions of the NSS are aimed [...] at removing any assistance given to Christians by local authorities - and it does appear to be mainly Christians that they target. "
  Christianity is the established religion in this country - naturally they will be the largest target for anyone involved in the cause of disestablishment. But it doesn't take more that a few seconds to see examples of the NSS highlighting the cause of persecuted Christians, sticking up for a Bishop's right to free speech, and siding with Christian bloggers. That's before you get to them taking a stance against ritual slaughter, or forced marriage, or Sharia law.
  

Last Word

The Church is going through a painful transition. Its waning influence on UK society and deep internal divisions on equal marriage are causing it to rupture.

Despite this, the Church of England is an incredibly rich institution - with an investment fund of around £5.3 billion. The Government cannot subsidise people to go to a specific church; so the church should divert a small fraction of its global investments towards local car parking for poor parishioners.

The Full Report

Sunday Parking Charges: Report to Woking Borough Council

Update

The proposed plan from Woking Borough Council - as reported via getSurrey looks like it just compounds the problem.

Dear Jonathan Lord,

I want to thank you for highlighting the inadequacy of South West Trains service from Woking. As commuters for four years, my wife and I are sick and tired of trains which are overcrowded, frequently late, and often filthy.

As the answer you received in Parliament shows, the private companies which provide train service in Woking are not looking after passengers' interests. They are expensive, inefficient and have a reckless disregard for safety.

I am therefore confused as to why the Government is pushing for the further privatisation of the NHS and Police force.

Given the disastrous privatisation of the railways that you have discovered, can I ask how you will be voting on 13 March 2012 on the debate to drop the NHS bill?

Yours sincerely,

Terence Eden

While I disagree with most of Mr Lord's politics, he's usually very good at getting back to me with sensible answers. I do wonder if the cognitive dissonance will be a problem in this instance.

Dear Humfrey Malins,

I understand that MPs plan to grant themselves the privilege of exempting themselves from Freedom of Information requests concerning their expenses.

Whenever I have a business expense, my employer asks for every receipt, no matter how small. How else is it to correctly pay its tax and protect itself against fraud?

I would like you to remember that it is MY money that you are spending.

I happily pay tax for the betterment of this country. I do not object to paying your wages or any other reasonable expenses you may have as you go about your business. What I object to is you hiding your spending from me. How else am I to gauge whether you are defrauding me or if you represent value for money?

As one of many people who is looking for a change of government at the next election, you action on this matter will influence my vote.

Yours sincerely,

Terence Eden

A scant 2 hours later, I had a reply!

Dear Mr Eden,

The House of commons authorities check our expenses to the last penny, and I have no problem publishing mine. I wonder if you agree that since Civil servants and the police are public servants whether they too should publish all their expenses

best wishes

Humfrey Malins CBE MP

So, I replied,

Dear Mr Malins,

Many thanks for your swift reply. It's great to see an MP engaging with their constituents. Do you have a blog or website where you will be publishing these figures?

I do believe that all Civil Servants should publish these expenses to the people who employ them.

If, for example, a Police Authority sees that a PC is claiming extortionate or unusual expenses, they should be able to challenge them. Ultimately, voters chose whether or not to employ an MP. Therefore, I think their expenses should be visible to the public. That said, the same should go for anyone who is employed by the state. I come from the Open Source Software world - one of our mantras is "Many eyes make all bugs shallow". The more people you have looking for a problem, the easier it is to spot and fix. It also means that people are less likely to behave maliciously if they know there is a good chance their misdeeds will be spotted.

Would you have any objection to me publishing this correspondence on my blog - https://shkspr.mobi/blog - ?

Many thanks - and please encourage all those in your party to vote to keep their expenses viewable by all.

Terence Eden

Bizarrely, I received a written response a few days later

So, full marks to Mr Malins for being on the ball with this one. It really is great to see what a bit of effort will get you.