It's been a quiet week - no meetings, which is good, because I've had no voice for most of the week, due to a chest infection. And despite the fact that it had no effect on my typing, I've had a bad week in terms of internet connections - the council system doesn't want to let me in and my home dial up is increasingly patchy, though I'm inclined to think the latter is about a secret campaign to get me to switch to broadband.

One of the topics of conversation in the Council House this week has been the issue of smoking, after an email was sent out telling people that we could no longer smoke in the courtyard or outside the public entrances to the building - prompting The Lord Mayor to take a stand in the press. He's got a point; I've no problem with smoking being banned within the building and boundaries of the Council House, but if you are going to prevent people from smoking outside the entrances to the Council House, then surely you would have to ban everyone from smoking in the public outdoor spaces around the Council House? The question needs to be asked, because we're not that far down the line yet..

I've smoked for several years, and I think I'm in a minority of smokers who agree with the concept of banning smoking in public places. I've seen how such bans have worked in other cities, and I think the inconvenience of not being able to smoke in pubs or restaurants probably helps people to decide to give up. Personally, I'd rather make the choice to give up when I'm just being inconvenienced, rather than when I'm forced to because smoking is made either illegal or so prohibitively expensive that I can no longer afford to smoke.

Anyway, the issue at this point is academic for me, as I spent yesterday afternoon at the Stop Smoking Service in the city centre. Having spent most of the week trying, very much against my will, to cough up my lungs, I decided to try and use my illness induced aversion to smoking as a basis for a serious attempt to give up. So I'm on Day One today, with the patches, and feeling quite confident. I'll see how long it lasts..

Another quiet week for meetings - a good chance to catch up with casework and make up some hours in the day job. I also managed to get down to London to visit my parents for the weekend. Everywhere I go now, I look at what other areas are doing and wonder if we could do it in Birmingham. I like the Oystercards for public transport in London -they seem much more user friendly than the travelcard system or the current system in Birmingham where there are numerous different passes for different types of transport and operators.

Heading to the station yesterday, we passed a car, which had clearly been involved in a crash, parked on the hard shoulder with notices saying 'Police Aware' in the windows. My Mum swears that this is a police initiative to educate people of dangers of crashing your car because she keeps seeing cars with these signs on roundabouts, and she has seen the same car in different places. I think this is an unintended side effect of delays in collecting abandoned cars. Who is right? I can't believe that damaged cars would just be left as an example, nor that the Police would expend the effort to move them to different areas in the borough as an illustration to drivers. It's just plausible enough to be believed though..

Finally, it's been eight days since my last post; it has also been eight days since my last cigarette. I've got one of those calendars on my computer which calculates how much money you save by giving up, which is almost as big an incentive right now as the other benefits. The real test will be my first election campaign without smoking..

Edited to add: There are some new links in the 'Other Blogs' section, which I really should change to the 'Other People's Jobs' section. In addition to a police officer and a magistrate, there are now links to blogs by a teacher, a London Ambulance Service EMT, a parking attendant, a school governor, and an NHS scientist. Go read!

Finally an answer to the Arthur Balfour mystery - thanks to Peter for the link! I am a bit disappointed to find that it was only a research exercise, but I suppose it does demonstrate the effectiveness of some forms of advertising..

The Masts scrutiny committee met again on Friday. We heard evidence from the National Radiological Protection Board, SCRAM (formerly Sutton Coldfield Residents Against Masts, now apparently Seriously Concerned Residents Against Masts), North Birmingham PCT and Dr Gerard Hyland. It was a fascinating meeting, and I feel like I've got a better grip on some of the scientific issues we've come across, but it is an issue that we could spend years on in scrutiny, and obviously we don't have that long.

One of the things that concerns me is that the campaigners focus on masts is not getting through to the public at large. When we spoke to the Operators last month, we were told that about 55 million people in Britain have mobiles - I've seen figures saying 80% of the population have them, and in some age groups, it is almost 100%. We choose to use mobile phones, though most of us wouldn't choose to have a mast near our house - I've only started noticing the number of masts near me since I've been on this committee. If you use a mobile phone, you've got an expectation of a level of service (or more accurately a level of signal that will allow you to use it where you choose). If we can't start addressing the expectations of phone users, how can we make an impact on the issues around masts? The only reason we have masts and base stations is because people are using mobile phones. We've talked around the issue - whether the mobile operators need the level of signal generated, whether they could operate on different frequencies, the need for much more research on the effects - but it's not a straightforward issue when there is such huge demand for the service. Once again I've got a list of references from the meeting to look up - more scientists next month..

How exactly do the Conservative Party select their candidates? I'm sure that no party is perfect at this, but they don't seem to be having much luck with them of late. Two candidates down in Slough - one for having his picture taken with guns, the other for his statements on the EU and the Catholic Church - how did no-one at Conservative Central Office pick up on that when he had written a book about it and it was openly reported in the local press? Maybe they were so impressed with his entry in the Guinness Book of Records that they overlooked his published views.

But presumably, they would expect people who hold positions within the Party to be a little more careful in what they say and do. Not so in the case of Danny Kruger or Howard Flight. If Michael Howard intends to take on every Tory candidate who steps out of line, he's probably not going to have much time left to campaign - and those candidates are going to have an interesting time in their own campaigns with Conservative Central Office listen to everything they say. The local Conservatives in Birmingham are already so desperate for council candidates that they are approaching people who aren't even members of the party - where are the Conservatives of the future coming from?

Who Runs this Place? An Anatomy of Britain in the 21st Century by Anthony Sampson

The Knife Man by Wendy Moore

The Rule of Four by Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason

The Talented Mr Ripley by Patricia Highsmith