It was released on Monday, a report that gave a detailed look at the idea of moving towards a system of carbon trading between individuals rather than green taxes. I've said in the past how much I like the ideas Tim Yeo puts forward, an MP that despite being a Tory seems to put forward (at least recently) very liberal and socially motivated suggestions...and given this is something that tackles my already documented annoyance with green taxes I just have to write about this particular scheme!

Can I just say... HALLELUJAH! If there is a god then they have obviously heard our collective prayers because today's PMQs was far beyond head and shoulders above the rest of the recent events

The reason for this seems to be partly down to a slight reduction in the heckling, but in reality I believe it to be because of as much as half the amount of planted Labour questions, real issues being discussed, and perhaps through a lack of pressure a Prime Minister that actually answered questions better without the constant need to attack "the party opposite"

Unfortunately the bill I have previously asked people to support didn't get a simple hearing on Friday as the timings involved meant that the debate has been delayed. This isn't a bad thing of course, it just means a bit of a wait for the verdict from the MPs interested, the debate continues on the 14th (this coming Friday). So, of course, I urge people to continue to support this trial especially given that we can see from Hansard just how a minority of people seem to be opposed to any positive move for utterly petty reasoning.

Is this the real reason why Nick Clegg has turned his party towards supporting the Government? The report suggests that the day before the Lib Dem's changed their stance, Gordon Brown stated that Proportional Representation might be on the table after the next election. The story goes that Jack Straw is keen to introduce PR (in particular the AV+ system proposed by the Jenkins Report to Blair in 1999) and the view from some is that a deal has been reached between the two parties.

Once upon a time I was in secondary school and had to do cookery lessons with everyone else as part of a revolving door scheme of design and technology work. This meant that cooking was only taught for a fraction of the year but it was potentially valuable experience. I say potentially because my cookery lessons did nothing to teach me the very basics of what I needed to get along with ingredients in my own home. A few years later I went to university and had a trial by fire in truly learning how to cook. I feel that this is the reality for many going through "food technology" lessons, so I have to welcome the news today about cookery being made compulsory with mixed emotions

The move is a great start, and I'm happy that we're moving in the right direction, but it's not enough and it's coming about too late in the day to do this in any half measures (excuse the pun). We need independently devised menu's that are flexible to the cultural needs of individual schools, we need the funding to let those menu's, independently assessed to be the best broad learning for a child, be taught properly, and we need to stop perpetuating myths about the cost of food because of a standard line on "means testing". More importantly, with a lack of teachers trained to deliver this course, we need this kind of thinking realised quicker.