Some stores exist only online. Others are in addition to their brick-and-mortars parent company.

Online stores, of all types, should ideally be built to sell. Products should be presented clearly, the site should be searchable, checkout should be painless.

The selling of products is a measurable matrix. You can see how many of each product was sold, how much revenue was generated, the conversion rate, average order size. Bottom-line sales, in other words, are easy to assess based on statistics.

But, as all retailers know, there is more to sales than exactly what is sold. Brand awareness, customer experience, the more esoteric dimensions, are also important.

In fact, as it turns out, particularly so in the world of online shopping.

A recent Neilson Online Study found that 80% buy from a store whose site they previously visited. That is a HUGE conversion rate.

The online/offline connection is especially driven by the fact that nowadays, many consumers do initial research on the web. They may ultimately make a purchase in a bricks-and-mortar store, but it is very likely that the final purchase will be based on information gathered online.

So aside from the fact that you want to be straight-up selling online, if you are indeed a multi-channel retailer, you may want to make sure that your web portal is as informative as possible, providing potential customers with all the types of information they desire, prior to making a purchase.

This includes up-to-date inventory, good product descriptions, interactivity and customer feedback functionality.

Your website is at minimal, another face to your business, if not your business in its entirety.

Intrigue is a powerful tool, and I am constantly advising clients not to say too much on their websites - leave the visitors gagging for more and they will hopefully contact you and give you the opportunity to make a real sale.  But it takes a lot of guts for a business to put substantial budget behind a teaser.

For me, the awareness of this brand - previously unknown to me - has leaped. Well done Form.

I come from a simpler marketing time.

As David Meerman Scott explained in his recent book, The New Rules of Marketing & PR, I was one of those cool agency folks who, “…sit in hip offices dreaming up ways to interrupt people so that they pay attention to a one-way message”.

I worked at a large ad agency (NWAyer) on accounts like DeBeers - diamonds is forever, AT&T - Reach out and touch someone and I even got to bring back Punchy of Hawaiian Punch fame when P&G bought the brand in the 1980s.

They were simpler days because marketing was able to be planned. You wanted “awareness” there were relatively few ways to do it and it costs money. Lots of it.

And so we cool agency folks became insulated and complacent. I remember when “Prodigy” did a major presentation at the agency and people bet on how fast it would fail (if you know what Prodigy is – please raise your hand and email me. If you don’t - never mind). My agency colleagues were only half right. Prodigy did fail – but the concept of connectivity lived on to what we now know and love as the Internet.

Now however, a corporate marketing exec type has to integrate traditional media with all these emerging concepts and make sense of it. Worse, any program he does now involves legions of people NOT from marketing. A corp marketing exec needs people from development and database management and web deployment teams and on and on. Gone are the "one department decision/ deployment" days.  

And if that wasn’t enough – agencies that know digital marketing tend to be run by twenty something’s who are just bigger kids just with bigger toys. They never had to stand in front of the CEO or CFO and explain why you needed another $50,000 to talk to people who aren’t even reporters!

Well it’s enough to make any corp marketing exec cry. I know because enough of my friends are in those roles and they come crying to me.

But there’s hope.

The trick now is for companies to find ways to plan these programs within predictable parameters just like a good old fashioned media plans because corporate budget are not known to be nimble. “But wait”, I hear you say, “viral IS UNPREDICTABLE”. The paradox of social marketing is that it often catches you unprepared and by the time you get your budget act together, well, your moment is gone.

The way to manage that within a corporate environment is to create a platform that organizes content distribution (which is the heart of soul of digital marketing) across media within a “campaign” model. Rather than throwing lots of social marketing toys onto the scene to see what sticks, plan campaigns around content distribution and key phrases that coordinate across functions – SEM, PR, article syndication and so forth within a specific timeframe that can be planned. This approach won’t cover all unexpected activities, but it beats trying to get any CFO to warm up to the idea of spending $50K so you can have a presence on Facebook.

Trust me – it ain’t pretty.

Brand Awareness and buzz is only significant if you know how and when it will effect your bottom line.

Photo from: www.asgren.com

And then there was the boys' 400-meter race. A preview of the future? Perhaps. A chance for eight "kids" to take spoonfuls from the pressure/excitement adrenaline bowl? Maybe.

But what it really turned into was a chance for a crowd of about 30,000 (throw in closed-circuit TV) to gasp in palpable discomfort when one of the young runners let his heart and soul move more quickly than his legs were able. One moment he was battling for the lead, the next he was face down on the track battling the mixed emotions of will, exposure and embarrassment (with, perhaps, a small dish of pain). Eventually he rose and shuffled across the finish line.

But not before the chatter began.

"How long before we see that on YouTube?" the guy next to me said, catching the attention of a young lady filming the race one row in front of us. "This will be something he'll never live down."

And this was just the kind of guy who would be responsible for sending the link to all of his buddies. And so perhaps the young man will live in infamy.

After the initial horror of imagining a life lived with the incessant video reminder of what might be this runner's most embarrassing public moment, I experienced a short pause. Short, but long enough to squeeze in the following thought (before retuning to my imagination): Approached with the right attitude, the social media outlets that will allow his misstep to live eternally, can prove of great value for the young man because they will teach (read: force) him to live authentically. Given that hiding from video footage would prove rather difficult, he will have little choice but to own the embarrassment and awkwardness and then move on.

In essence, the necessary authenticity will liberate him. And, in the long run, that will prove more valuable than a life spent trying to hide from what happened today. People in general, and those who inhabit the Internet's social space in particular, crave authenticity. In fact, because of the information inundation, most demand it.

And that's a lesson for entities large and small, from the personal blogger to the national brand. And you thought this was just a story about a little track and field blunder.

Well, it's not...although that kind of road rash could keep Bactine in business for a year.

How can you protect and ensure that kind of authenticity -- whether it's self-reflection, corporate messaging or product launch?

Nhận biết thương hiệu là giai đoạn đầu tiên trong tiến trình tiến trình mua sắm và là một tiêu chí quan trọng để đo lường sức mạnh của thương hiệu. Một thương hiệu càng nổi tiếng thì càng dễ dàng được khách hàng lựa chọn. Tuy vậy, việc quảng bá thương hiệu  cũng rất tốn kém nên việc hiểu rõ được mức độ ảnh hưởng của sự nhận biết đến tiến trình lựa chọn sản phẩm sẽ giúp cho các doanh nghiệp có được các thức xây dựng thương hiệu đạt hiệu quả cao với một chi phí hợp lý hơn.

Sự nhận biết thương hiệu được tạo ra từ các chương trình truyền thông như quảng cáo, quan hệ cộng đồng, khuyến mãi, bán hàng cá nhân hay tại nơi trưng bày sản phẩm. Mức độ nhận biết thương hiệu có thể chia ra làm 3 cấp độ khác nhau. Cấp độ cao nhất chính là thương hiệu được nhận biết đầu tiên (Top of mind). Cấp độ kế tiếp là không nhắc mà nhớ (spontaneous). Cấp độ thấp nhất là nhắc để nhớ (Promt). Khi cộng gộp 3 cấp độ nhận biết thương hiệu thì ta sẽ là tổng số nhận biết nhãn hiệu.

Thương hiệu được nhận biết đầu tiên chính là thương hiệu mà khách hàng sẽ nghĩ đến đầu tiên khi được hỏi về một loại sản phẩm nào đó. Ví dụ, khi nghĩ đến tivi thì người Việt Nam thường nghĩ đến Sony đầu tiên, tương tự khi nói đến xe gắn máy thì mọi người thường nghĩ ngay đến Honda. Và kết quả là Sony và Honda luôn là những  thương hiệu được mọi người cân nhắc khi chọn lựa mua sản phẩm. Với những loại sản phẩm hay dịch vụ mà người tiêu dùng lên kế hoạch mua sắm trước khi đến nơi bán hàng thì tiêu chí thương hiệu nhận biết  đầu tiên đóng vai trò rất quan trọng. Điều này được lý giải là đối với những sản phẩm đắt tiền thì người ta thường luôn lên kế hoạch cho việc mua sắm, vì vậy mà thường người mua đã lựa chọn thương hiệu mà mình sẽ mua từ trước, và thường thì thương hiệu mà họ nghĩ đến đầu tiên sẽ rất dễ được người mua chọn lựa. Một số ví dụ về sản phẩm thuộc chủng loại này như Tivi, xe máy, máy tính, điện thoại…

Thông thường khi một thương hiệu có độ nhận biết đầu tiên lớn hơn 50% thi hầu như rất khó có thể nâng cao chỉ số này. Chính vì vậy, để cải thiện chỉ số này thì đòi hỏi phải quá nhiều chi phí trong khi hiệu quả thì không được bao nhiêu nên nhiệm vụ của doanh nghiệp là nên duy trì mức độ nhận biết ở mức độ này.

Đối với các sản phẩm hàng tiêu dùng như dầu gội đầu, kem đánh răng, bột giặt… thì tổng số nhận biết thương hiệu đóng vai trò quan trọng. Tiêu chí nhận biết đầu tiên luôn luôn quan trọng nhưng đối với những sản phẩm mà người ta quyết định tại điểm mua hay mua sắm mà không hoạch định trước thì chỉ số tổng độ nhận biết luôn được doanh nghiệp quan tâm hơn. Khi một người nội chợ đi siêu thị mua sắm trong tuần thì họ thường nghĩ là sẽ mua bột giặt nhưng họ thường không hoạch định sẽ mua omo hay tide nên khi đi siêu thị đến nơi trưng bày họ đều có thể quyết định mua bất kỳ thương hiệu nào mà họ biết.

Nếu tổng độ nhận biết thương hiệu lớn hơn 90% thì rất tốt và hầu như rất khó để nâng độ nhận biết lên 100%. Chính vì vậy, chi phí cho việc quảng bá thương hiệu khi hầu hết mọi người đã biết đến thương hiệu của mình thì không hiệu quả. Doanh nghiệp chỉ nên quảng bá thương hiệu một cách không thường xuyên nhằm duy trì mức độ nhận biết này.

Nguyễn Thanh Hồng Đức -  LANTABRAND

I stumbled across Kristen Nicole's article on Mashable titled, "Use Flickr for Custom Capital One Cards" and thought it was a great campaign for several personal reasons.

First, Capital One makes it simple to create a personalized credit card. I already have a Capital One card but now I can select a photo that's already hosted on my Flickr account or simply upload a jpeg from my PC and make it more fun. See upload guidelines here.

Second, by using a personal photo I'm creating an emotional attachment with my credit card. When I'm in the middle of a transaction, do I whip out my boring debit card or use my fancy customized Capital One card? Chances are, I'm going to whip out the Capital One card then chat with the clerk on how fun it was customizing my credit card and tell her where she can go online to create her own!

It would have also been interesting to see what would happen if the Capital One Image Card promotion ran a user-generated contest around the campaign. Let people create their custom Capital One card with their favorite photo then offer a prize (i.e. a $150 Capital One Gas Card) for the best design in a photo category (i.e. Family, Best Friends, Graduation, etc.).

People can engage longer with the promotion and check out what other people have designed and leave comments if they want to. And if they're not interested in other people's creations, they can still order their new card. That's a great way of building brand awareness in my opinion, what do you think?

Create your own personalized Capital One credit card now.

(Avatar Credit: PosePrints.com)

(Photo Credit: CapitalOne)

Why?  Every year the American public is hit with nearly 300,000 newly published books and an endless number of products and services.  The point is that no matter what you sell or promote, you have fierce competition to contend with.  Your challenge then is to stay ahead of your competitors and continuously be in the face of your prospective customers.

How do I know this?  As a business owner for nearly 20 years, I know the effect that "buzz" marketing has had on my own businesses.  And, like many companies, without a large marketing budget my challenge has always been to think out of the box and find cost effective marketing solutions that keep my company and name in front of my audience.

Any "buzz" marketing starts with a little "Marketing 101."  Simply put, identify your audience and then make yourself known to them - over and over again. But stay in front of them with quality information that will benefit them.

How do you do that?  I think you know my answer: THE MEDIA!  You've probably heard me say a million times that the media is the pathway to consumers... and it's true!  How else can you gather a captive audience of thousands or millions at one time, who listen to you talk about your book or product for 10 to 20 minutes?  That's some powerful buzz marketing.

But, it's media exposure on a continuous basis that creates this "buzz".  It provides credibility you can't put a price on and at the same time, generates a valuable level of brand awareness.  And, unlike consistent advertising, on-going media exposure won't kill your marketing budget.

Now don't get me wrong.  I'm not suggesting that "buzz" campaigns will supply instant sales results.  I'm saying, if you are consistently in front of your customers with valuable information, eventually the "buzz" will bring them in.

His voice is instantly recognisable - high-pitched, perhaps a little clipped, the authentic accents of a public schoolboy of the 1950s. Archie hasn't changed a bit.

The smaller but by no means lesser half of the ventriloquism act which was once broadcast into sixteen million homes has chosen to speak exclusively to Newsnight about his long-awaited comeback.

'I thought, I'm comfortable with you. You lot will know your way around something wooden. That came out wrong but you know what I mean. Be patient with me - I haven't spoken to anyone in forty years!'

Candy-striped

It's better not to dwell on the details of Archie's long eclipse from public view - I'd been warned that he was likely to be tight-lipped. But it's a credit to his engrained showbusiness chops that he is immaculate today in candy-striped school blazer and matching scarf.

'You know what they say, you can't put a good doll down,' he says.

Archie has agreed to meet the Newsnight team on a sun-dappled canal bank in Greater Manchester, where the former star of Educating Archie is relishing his longest professional engagement since his old partner Peter Brough retired in the sixties.

Archie is appearing at the Portland Basin Museum. 'They're looking after me here. I'm in a display case, which is definitely not where I see Archie Andrews in the medium- to long-term, but on the other hand the kids all see me when they come in. I'm top of the bill, you might say.'

The revival in Archie's fortunes began when he found himself a new manager. 'All the other toys had been bending my ear about representation. That's all you hear from the new kids. With the guys on Tobermory, it's like 'My agent's got me this book deal' or 'I'm making a record with the Crazy Frog!' Please!'

Pint-sized

Archie's now being looked after by Colin Burnett Dick, a care home director from Sussex who spent the best part of £40,000 of his own money on the pint-sized performer when the late Peter Brough's family put him up for auction.

'We had some investments sitting around not making us much money and we thought, this would be fun,' he says.

Colin had been fascinated by ventriloquists ('vents') since developing a morbid childhood fear that his own toys might come to life. Despite, or because of this, he was moved to hear of Archie's plight, condemned to long years in a suitcase after the curtain finally came down on Educating Archie.

On the canalside, Archie turns his head away, with a barely perceptible click. 'I'm not bitter, I haven't got a bitter bone in my body, but I mean to say, we used to be the biggest vent act on radio!'

'What happened, do you think?'

'Well, there's so much more for the kids to do now, that's what they all tell me, "The little talking boy is gone for good". Well let me tell you this, I'm STILL small. It's showbiz that got big.'

A transition to the small screen wasn't entirely successful, and even the act's greatest admirers admit that Peter Brough was never the most technically gifted vent. Showbiz folklore has it that he even filed his front teeth in a doomed attempt to get his tongue around the more difficult syllables.

Sap

Is Colin Burnett Dick well advised in his plans to find a new partner for Archie, and put him back on the road?

Mark Felgate, a young comedian who started out as a vent, says he wouldn't be interested. 'I always found those old dolls a bit creepy.' He prefers to incorporate the hard-won skills of voice-tossing into his stand-up act.

But Donna Marie Walton says she'd like to try her hand with Archie. An 18-year-old vent who works with a gorilla called Louis, Donna Marie has a deep, almost sepulchral range which belies her tender years.

She's the protégé of the legendary Roger de Courcey, of Nookie fame, who says that only a vent of Donna's generation could rejuvenate the Archie Andrews brand.

'Brand? I'm not a brand. This kind of stuff doesn't grow on trees, you know,' says Archie. 'All I know is, I can't wait to get cracking again. The sap's rising! And you can quote me on that.'

With the former England captain about to embark on a new career in US soccer for LA Galaxy and his pop star wife about to hit US TV screens, Brand Beckham is about to go into overdrive.

Like them or loathe them, footballer David Beckham and Spice Girl Victoria have become a celebrity tag-team of glamour, wealth and fame.

From the moment the pair announced their engagement in 1998 the couple's lives have been splashed across every tabloid, magazine - and even the occasional broadsheet.

It would have been hard to miss some of the coverage their tattoos, baby names, weight problems, matching outfits and hairstyles have generated over the last 10 years.

But now it is time for Britain's most famous celebrity couple to pack up Beckingham Palace and move Brand Beckham to Tinsel Town.

'American idols'

To make sure their relocation is welcomed by a blaze of publicity, Posh and Becks have blitzed the US press with a whistle-stop tour, as well as doing their most saucy photo shoot yet.

In a nine-page spread in the August edition of W Magazine, the couple are seen posing in underwear, kissing and striking provocative poses.

The magazine says the pair are "determined to become the new American idols".

Victoria, who recently announced she would be touring with the Spice Girls, has even opened up for the first time about her husband's alleged affair in 2004.

Rebecca Loos, who was Beckham's personal assistant when he played for his former club Real Madrid, was reportedly paid £300,000 for her story in which she claimed she had a fling with him.

As the story broke the Beckhams closed rank.

The lawyers were called in, David branded the allegations as "ludicrous and absurd", and the married couple were photographed in an exclusive French ski resort showing signs of public affection.

Famous friends

It was clear that the message was about the Beckham Brand - which has always thrived off a happy and perfect family ideal - was staying together.

Speaking to reporters about the scandal, which was described as a "tabloid editor's dream", 33-year-old Victoria said: "I'm not going to lie. It was a really tough time.

"David and I got through it together. No-one said marriage was going to be easy.

"But now we've come out stronger and happier. It's even better now than when we were first married."

Clearly having put that behind them, the Beckhams are moving on to bigger and better things.

Best friends with British stars Elton John, Liz Hurley and Gordon Ramsay, they are keen to add Hollywood A-listers to their Christmas card list.

High profile

Already close to Tom Cruise and wife Katie Holmes, it was reported last year that Victoria had also struck up a friendship with Jennifer Lopez.

In an interview to be broadcast on NBC's Today show, Victoria discusses newly- weds Cruise and Holmes, denying their Scientology beliefs get in the way of their friendship.

"There's been so much made of the Scientology," she says.

"They do their thing, we do our thing. They are a wonderful family."

Next week NBC will air a fly-on-the-wall documentary called, Victoria Beckham: Coming To America, which chronicles her move to Los Angeles.

Disappointingly for Victoria, the planned six-part reality series has been cut to just a one-hour special.

But she is managing to maintain a high profile, presenting a gong at the recent MTV Movie Awards and being photographed with actress Cameron Diaz after the pair turned up wearing the same shoes.

Things are looking good for David too as ticket sales are already up at LA Galaxy, his new team.

Gossip columnists on both sides of the Atlantic are already gearing up to document the couple's success or downfall once they settle in LA.

'Shrewd career move'

Speaking to Agence France Presse, Joel Stratte-McClure, from the Los Angeles Daily News thinks going Stateside makes professional sense for them both.

"This is a very shrewd move for Beckham, because what do you do when your soccer career is over? You get involved in entertainment and movies.

"And what do you do when your singing career is over? You get involved in entertainment and movies. So for both of them, it's very shrewd."

BBC Radio 1 Newsbeat's US reporter Heather Alexander thinks they still have their work cut out to make it big.

"It seems they've succeeded in getting everyone to know who they are, but now everyone's waiting to see what they will do.

"The US is already full of beautiful thin celebrities, so they have to mark themselves out as different if they want to become more than just photo shoot pin-ups," she says.

Paul Crowther is a professor of astrophysics at Sheffield University.

He has been a regular commentator on the funding cuts that have thrown UK particle physics and astronomy into turmoil.

BBC science reporter Paul Rincon caught up with Prof Crowther at Queen's University Belfast, which was hosting this year's National Astronomy Meeting.

Paul Rincon: How would you describe the current status of funding of UK astronomy and particle physics?

Paul Crowther: We're talking about fundamental physics: particle physics, astronomy, space science, and nuclear physics. There was an £80m shortfall in the STFC (Science and Technology Facilities Council) budget for the next three years. And right now, we're facing the consequences of that shortfall because we are not able to maintain the existing programme in terms of running laboratories, exploiting facilities and having access to facilities. So there have been a number of consequences of this shortfall.

What you said about this issue

PR: What are the biggest-hit programmes as a result of this shortfall and what do they do from here? Do scientists just pack up and go home?

PC: The STFC involves facilities, it involves technology development and it involves science. There is a certain element that is fixed, involving commitments to subscriptions to, for example, Cern (European Organization for Nuclear Research) and Esa (European Space Agency). There are other elements that involve running facilities and laboratories such as Diamond (synchrotron facility) at Harwell.

There are other elements such as providing UK involvement in ground-based and space-based telescopes - some of which are under threat. In addition, there is the access to exploitation grants in departments of physics around the country. Right now, that is also being hit by a 25% cut in the number of research grants across particle physics, astronomy and nuclear physics.

PR: So why are scientists so angry? Presumably funding must have gone up and down in the past - what's so different about these cuts and the way they're hitting astronomers and physicists?

PC: "Blue skies" research like astronomy and particle physics has always been up and down. But it is the scale of the cuts and the suddenness of the cuts that has shocked the community. The reason we're so frustrated is that there was no warning, really, before Autumn last year about the scale of the cuts. At some level, it goes back to the way in which this blue skies research is funded.

Over a year ago, it was funded through a research council called PParc (the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council) which was purely astronomy and particle physics. But that was later merged with the CCLRC (Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils) to produce STFC. It is this combined research council that has - overall - had a pretty decent return from government: 13.6% over three years is, in principle, a good return. Unfortunately, subscriptions to international commitments and the cost of running laboratories increases at greater than inflation.

So the effect of this "flat cash" settlement from government has been an unprecedented impact on the ability of, for example, departments to do long-term planning in terms of staff appointments.

Because the flat cash settlement does not take into account inflation, spending power is eroded over the three years. So the research council is facing an inability to deliver on things the government and the scientists would like us to deliver on. In addition, this new research council has had to take on board these things without the right advisory structures in place.

PR: Some commentators have said that the community should have anticipated the squeeze in funding. Is that a view that you have any sympathy with?

PC: I think there have been communication difficulties - that's certainly true. There has been a lack of engagement with the community from this new research council - from the management. But if we take the blue skies research done in astronomy and particle physics - we got flat cash, as did the EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council) which deals with applied physics.

But they have been impacted by a change of a few percent in the volume of grants and research they can carry out. The STFC has a different structure which means it has been 25%. That is a big hit to take for departments in terms of their long-term planning. The lack of communication has been the key to the community's furore over the implementation by the research council of the settlement from government.

PR: What are the big questions astronomers want to ask Keith Mason, STFC's chief executive?

PC: The key from the astronomy perspective is that we want to get the best return for the taxpayer for the money that has gone in. Right now, because of the way in which the STFC has been set up in terms of its advisory structures of scientists, just too few scientists have been involved in the decision-making process. So the community doesn't feel involved or engaged in that process.

As a result of this, there has been a prioritisation of which facilities are top priority and are of lower priority, and that has been done by a very small number of scientists. Astronomers are a very disparate bunch. Some people want to study the Sun in detail, some want to carry out a mission to Mars, others want to study galaxies from space or planets from the ground.

So we all have our own bits of kit we want. When you have so few scientists on those panels deciding on those prioritisations, even with their best efforts, it has been impossible for the community to feel as if the best use of taxpayers' money has been made. It's really down to getting the most cost-effective return for the money that is available. When you have limited money, you really need to perform that juggling act as carefully as possible.

Up until now, there has been a lack of confidence from the community in whether the STFC has made the best use of the money we have. So there was a ranking of facilities and - to give STFC their due - they had a three-week consultation period. It was short, but nevertheless it went ahead. Now there are small panels deciding on whether they agree or do not agree on the prioritisation that was done by this advisory structure.

PR: So what can we expect from those panels?

PC: The small panels will be feeding back the community response to the advisory structures in the STFC. Those are going to be responding in the next few weeks. Thereafter, there will be a period of trying to implement those with the fixed amount of money they have.

So we think that by the beginning of July, they will be in a position to say which facilities are to stay and which ones will not. The concerns many people have is that a lot of the programmes which the UK is leading and will benefit UK scientists in the next five years are in the bottom half of the prioritisation. Some of the things which are in the top half, while addressing fundamental questions, are not where the UK is leading.

They are where the UK is buying into some component. Certain projects, such as eMerlin and Astrogrid - where the UK has taken a lead - are brand new, just out of the box, yet are facing immediate closure.

PR: There seems to be a real disconnect between the projects that look set to receive continued funding and those which the community thinks should receive continued funding. Are there any patterns that can be teased from the prioritisation? Has, for example, space exploration fared better than astronomy?

PC: Clearly, the research council has a science and technology strategy. But the community hasn't, as yet, been told what that is. But it certainly involves things like increased involvement in the space exploration programme through Esa. And that's a means of the UK securing an Esa science centre at Harwell in Oxfordshire. And space exploration is a good thing.

But the concern is that everything else is being squeezed because of that strategy. Therefore, science at some level is at a lower tier than the strategy of the research council. I think what would be great would be to have a space exploration programme as well as an astronomy and particle physics blue skies programme. But right now, there are, perhaps, too many things being squeezed into the available budget.

Right now, the community feel they haven't had the strategy fully communicated to them and there has been this problem where we've had to tease information out of government and the research councils using methods such as Freedom of Information Act requests.

When times are good, then everyone's happy. But when times are tough, like now, we as a community need to know what the priorities are and what we can do to lobby government, to respond to the priorities of the research council and really get the best return for the money that the UK taxpayer puts in.

PR: Lastly, where do you think this could lead in terms of future UK astronomy and particle physics capability? What effect is this going to have, for example, on the numbers of young people coming into science?

PC: Clearly, the government has made it clear that they want to make science in universities more directly beneficial to the economy in the short term. And I think that is the right strategy. But the concern is that it is particle physics and astronomy that really motivates students towards doing science - especially physics - at university.

The signals that are being sent out right now are negative ones towards fundamental physics and blue skies research. In the long-term, if you want to have a knowledge-based economy, and a scientifically literate country, then you need to invest - at a relatively modest level compared to other areas of science - in fundamental science, to get students into the system.

Once they're in they find out about amazing things going on in applied physics. But it is things like astronomy that get students into studying science at university.

We solicited your comments on the financial woes currently facing UK physics and astronomy. The comments below relate to this page and the parallel interview with STFC chief executive, Prof Keith Mason.

Having close links with Daresbury Lab in Cheshire I am personally seeing the impact this is having on the morale of the staff and scientists. This facility is fantastic and if you had attended any of the open days which they hold for the staff, their families and the local schools you would really see what motivates children to go and study science. Removing this kind of hands on access to science will damage our science capability for generations to come. The cuts are very shortsighted. Science is an essential part to every day life without it how would you drive to work in a morning , heat the water to make a brew or find cures for cancer.
Lisa J Cordwell, Irlam

The STFC chief exec is quoted here as asserting "We have never withdrawn, or indicated that we would withdraw from Gemini." Compare this to the STFC press release of 15th November: "the STFC informed the Board that the STFC, in shaping its programme for the next 3 years and beyond, is planning to withdraw from the Gemini Observatory." Is it any wonder there was "a bit of a misunderstanding"? Paul Crowther's www page includes a good summary of contradictory statements from STFC on this issue.
Russell Smith, Durham

There is more than a little irony in Keith Mason laying the blame for astronomy's current funding problems on the introduction of Full Economic Costing (FEC) as a mechanism to make research properly sustainable. The grant that supports astronomy research here in Nottingham was scheduled for renewal last year. We duly put in our bid for support, including the level of FEC that had been calculated as appropriate for sustaining research (using an official audited process called the TRAC protocol). The grant was highly rated by the review panel, and recommended for funding, including the level of FEC that we had requested. There was then a lengthy delay as the full extent of the funding problems in STFC became apparent. Finally, the grant was announced, but in order to try and meet some of its budget shortfall, the recommended level of FEC had been slashed by more than a factor of two. Consultation with other universities that had grants in for renewal this round indicates! that they suffered comparable arbitrary cuts in the level of FEC awarded. If our experience is anything to go by, STFC is not spending its new money on anything like the level of FEC required to sustain a research programme.
Michael Merrifield, Professor of Astronomy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham

I found Keith Mason's response to the question about Students wondering if it was worth staying in astronomy to be quite insulting. I am approaching the end of a four year masters degree in physics and astrophysics and have been planning to do a phd in some are of space research. The reason I, like other students, am worried by the cuts is not that I feel I won't make money but that the cuts will make it harder for me to find a job at all! It is the nature of the economy the STFC claims to be supporting that you need to make money to survive. I know that a research career in astronomy will never make me a millionaire. If I wanted to make money then I would work in the city where physics degrees are in high demand. My reasons for wanting to get into astronomy research are my curiosity and desire for knowledge, not wealth. However I can't do this for nothing. Perhaps we should ask how much Prof Mason earns for leading STFC. Surely serving your country shouldn't be about the money?
Tim Coveney, Hull Uk

The really stupid aspect of the decisions was that previous funding of millions of pounds had gone into developing capital facilities like eMerlin only for them to be stopped. eMerlin is due to come on stream this year but for a cost of 1/3 an England football manager we will lose any benefit from the millions spent over the last few years - this is called sensible planning!
Ros, Renfrewshire

As a physicist (and "part time"astrophyz) I feel very disappointed by the sudden cuts in funding. I fear that the lack of funding could be a major set back and that the position of the UK will suffer eventually. Space technology has been providing jobs for many, and advances in science and technology do not come only from the bio/ chemistry part. May I add that I have nothing against biologists or chemists. Nuclear power is bound to take more importance if we want clean energy. How can we do it if research, and training at the grassroots levels are impeded? When I learnt of the closing of Reading university's physics department, I felt betrayed. The other critical problem for the lack of funding will be the lack of jobs for fresh graduates and postgrads leading highly skilled worker seeking jobs abroad. Very bad for UK's economy.
Kim Vignitchouk, guildford

Britain is one of the richest countries in the world and our Science research is world class. I'm disgusted that the government cannot be bothered to provide the funding required. This research could benefit the whole of mankind and I find it incredible that it is treated with such disrespect by the Government.
Albert Leach, Southampton, Hampshire, UK

Has anyone noticed? It's the countries that invest heavily in science and technology education and research that are the wealthiest and happiest? What does UK do? Close university chemistry departments and fund art galleries and theatre groups.
Michael Papworth, Evesham

I was funded by PPARC (the predecessor of STFC) to study my Astrophysics PhD and I am appalled by the continuing stories of cuts and projects under threat. Fundamental physics research is so important to the UK - not just economically but also culturally. This £80 million shortfall represents less than 0.1% of either the NHS or social welfare budget! Why can't the government just write STFC a cheque?
James Steel, Clitheroe, UK

I'm a science teacher. The government has provided incentives for certain science undergraduates to specialise as science teachers because of a predicted shortage, and all that implies for the UK's future. In parallel we have crisis-management by STFC members, talk of "taxpayers' money" and that "taxpayers have a right to a return." What constitutes this future "return" is not clear, nor even how they predict it, but it's news and there is no disguising this fatuous situation from my students: not one of them wants to be a scientist, or a science teacher.
David Marshall, London

I'm a science teacher. The government has provided incentives for certain science undergraduates to specialise as science teachers because of a predicted shortage, and all that implies for the UK's future. In parallel we have crisis-management by STFC members, talk of "taxpayers' money" and that "taxpayers have a right to a return." What constitutes this future "return" is not clear, nor even how they predict it, but it's news and there is no disguising this fatuous situation from my students: not one of them wants to be a scientist, or a science teacher.
David Marshall, London

Reading the above article it seems to me that what we don't want is investment into research being dictated by media interest lobbying and vested interest. The job of deciding the level of resources in the various area's will always be contentious however, I would think that it would be important to make the decisions transparent and for changes to take place over a three to five year time frame to enable the changes in the number of research graduates needed in each area to be planned for. There is only one thing that you can guarantee and that is the decisions will be wrong at least 30% of the time. I personally think to much of our research funding is being spent on particle and astro physics.
T Carlin, Suffolk

Just to make it clear the funding body have been given an 11% rise in latest 3 yr budget by Government.
Mark, Sheffield UK

The point is 'Was the government made fully aware of the impact of introducing FeC during the spending review?'. Also short-term funding problems become long-term problems as expertise lost is not easily regained.
G Burt, Glasgow

Do we/industry make any money out of the projects, if the answer is NO then it must get the chop are other EU partners doing the same or similar research if the answer is yes it must be the chop
Alan, morpeth

In this interview Professor Mason comes across as being the mealy-mouthed puppet of a weasel Government that is cutting science budgets, hiding behind terms like "Full Economic Costing", "Flagships" and "Visions". Is this man a champion of the UK science or a champion of his government masters?
Alastair Donald, Abingdon, UK

From now to the end UK will depend of USA Crumbs.
Gustavo Mendoza, Lima, Peru

We can waste billions of pounds on Iraq and the Olympics but can't find what is a relatively small amount of money to support our technological future. It's time our government woke up.
W Bates, Poynton, UK

£1bn was found for the millennium dome, £9.3bn for the Olympics, £100bn to bail out Northern Rock. And yet £80m, spread over 3 years, can't be found to cover a science budget shortfall. Where are the government's priorities? If they were truly committed to science, this money would be made available immediately!!!
Chris Johnston, Belfast

Click here to return

THE ENGAGEMENT

1.The Queen is the first British monarch to have celebrated a diamond wedding anniversary.

2. Princess Elizabeth and Philip first met when they attended the wedding of Philip's cousin, Princess Marina of Greece to The Duke of Kent, who was an uncle of Princess Elizabeth, in 1934.

3. The engagement between Princess Elizabeth and Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten RN was announced on the 9 July 1947. Philip was born Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark. He joined the Royal Navy in 1939 and after the war, in February 1947, became a naturalised British subject. Philip was required to choose a surname in order to continue his career in the Royal Navy, and adopted Mountbatten, the name of his mother's British relatives. He was created Duke of Edinburgh by King George VI on marriage.

4. The platinum and diamond engagement ring was made by the jewellers, Philip Antrobus, using diamonds from a tiara belonging to Philip's mother.

5. Philip had two stag parties the night before the wedding - the first at the Dorchester to which the press were invited and the second with his closest friends at the Belfry Club.

WESTMINSTER ABBEY

6. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh were married in Westminster Abbey on 20 November, 1947 at 1130GMT with 2,000 invited guests.

7. It was the first, and so far only time in British history, that the heir presumptive to the throne had been married.

8. The Queen was the 10th member of the Royal Family to be married in the Abbey. The first Royal wedding to take place in the Abbey was when King Henry I married Princess Matilda of Scotland on 11 November, 1100. On 26 April, 1923, the Queen's parents King George VI and Queen Elizabeth (then the Duke and Duchess of York) were married there.

9. The eight bridesmaids were: HRH The Princess Margaret, HRH Princess Alexandra of Kent, Lady Caroline Montagu-Douglas-Scott, Lady Mary Cambridge, Lady Elizabeth Lambart, The Hon. Pamela Mountbatten, The Hon. Margaret Elphinstone, The Hon. Diana Bowes-Lyon.

10. There were two pages: HRH Prince William of Gloucester and HRH Prince Michael of Kent, both aged just five.

11. Guests attending the wedding included the King and Queen of Denmark, the King and Queen of Yugoslavia, the Kings of Norway, Romania and the Shah of Iran.

THE OUTFITS

12.The Queen's wedding dress was designed by Sir Norman Hartnell, who had submitted designs for the dress in August 1947.

13. The fabric for the dress was woven at Winterthur Silks Limited, Dunfermline, in the Canmore factory, using silk that had come from Chinese silkworms at Lullingstone Castle.

14. The Queen's bridal veil was made of tulle and held by a tiara of diamonds. This tiara was made for Queen Mary in 1919. It was made from re-used diamonds taken from a necklace/tiara purchased by Queen Victoria from Collingwood and Co and a wedding present for Queen Mary in 1893. In August 1936, Queen Mary gave the tiara to Queen Elizabeth from whom it was borrowed by Princess Elizabeth for her wedding in 1947.

15. After the wedding, the dress was exhibited at St James's Palace and was then shown in the capital towns of the British Isles and in Glasgow, Liverpool, Bristol, Preston, Leicester, Nottingham, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds and Huddersfield.

THE FLOWERS

16. The bride's wedding bouquet was supplied by the Worshipful Company of Gardeners and made by the florist MH Longman. It was of white orchids with a sprig of myrtle from the bush grown from the original myrtle in Queen Victoria's wedding bouquet. An identical copy of the bouquet was made and presented to The Queen on her Golden Wedding in 1997.

17. The grave of the Unknown Warrior was the only stone that was not covered by the special carpet in the Abbey. The day after the wedding, Princess Elizabeth followed a Royal tradition started by her mother, of sending her wedding bouquet back to the Abbey to be laid on this grave.

18. The bridesmaids wore wreaths in their hair of miniature white sheaves, Lilies and London Pride, modelled in white satin and silver lame. They were made by Jac Ltd of London. The pages wore Royal Stewart tartan kilts.

19. The bridesmaids' bouquets, prepared by Moyses Stevens, were of white orchids, lilies of the valley, gardenias, white bouvardia, white roses and white nerine.

THE SERVICE

20. The bells of St Margaret's Church, Westminster Abbey, hailed the arrival of the carriage procession. The Queen arrived at the Abbey with her father, George VI, in the Irish State Coach.

21. Other music at the wedding included: Psalm 67 (God be merciful unto us and bless us) sung to a setting by EC Bairstow; the motet We Wait For Thy Loving Kindness, O God, by Dr William McKie, organist and master of the choristers of the Abbey; the hymn The Lord's My Shepherd (to the then relatively unknown Scottish tune Crimond); the anthem Blessed Be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, by SS Wesley was sung by the Abbey choir and members of the choirs of the Chapel Royal and St George's Chapel Windsor; and after signing the register in St Edward's Chapel, the procession made its way out of the Abbey to Mendelssohn's Wedding March.

22. There were 91 singers at the wedding, made up from the Abbey Choir, the Choir of HM Chapels Royal and additional tenors and basses. They sat in the organ loft as the choir stalls were occupied by various dignitaries.

23. William McKie, the Abbey organist, had been summoned to the Palace four days before the wedding so that Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret could sing the descant to Crimond to him so that he could note it down as no other copy was available.

24. The two Royal kneelers, used during the service, were covered in rose pink silk. They were made from orange boxes, due to war time austerity, and date stamped 1946.

25. The altar was hung with the white dorsal given in 1911 by King George V and Queen Mary for their coronation and the 1937 coronation frontal given by the Princess' parents. The Abbey plate was displayed on the altar.

26. The bride's wedding ring was made from a nugget of Welsh gold which came from the Clogau St David's mine, near Dolgellau.

27. As not all the people to sign the register could fit into St Edward's Chapel, only the bride and groom, the King and Queen, Queen Mary and Princess Andrew of Greece (the groom's mother), the Archbishop, and the Dean of Westminster signed it at this point. The rest of the signatures were added later at Buckingham Palace. They included: Princess Margaret, Prince George of Greece (the groom's uncle), Henry (Duke of Gloucester), Alice (Duchess of Gloucester), Princess Marina (Duchess of Kent), Lady Patricia Ramsay, Alexander Ramsay, Alice Mary (Countess of Athlone), Earl of Athlone, Victoria Milford Haven, Nada Milford Haven, Edwina Mountbatten of Burma, Earl Mountbatten of Burma, King Haakon (of Norway), King Michael (of Romania), Queen Ingrid (of Denmark), King Frederick (of Denmark).

28. Trumpet fanfares were introduced for the first time at a Royal wedding in the Abbey. A white flag was waved in the organ loft to signal the fanfare once the register had been signed.

29. The position of the BBC microphones had to be carefully checked as at the 1934 Royal wedding, the Abbey cross had hit the microphone suspended above the altar steps. Radio commentators shared the organ loft with the choir.

PUBLIC CELEBRATIONS

30. Thousands of people lined the processional route and were able to file through the Abbey after the service. Millions listened to the live radio broadcast.

31. The film of the wedding was watched by many thousands of people at cinemas across the country.

32. About 10,000 telegrams of congratulations were received at Buckingham Palace.

WEDDING GIFTS

33. The Royal couple received over 2,500 wedding presents from well-wishers around the world. Most were put on display for a few days in a charity exhibition at St James's Palace. From India, there was a piece of crocheted, cotton lace made from yarn personally spun by Mahatma Gandhi. The central motif reads "Jai Hind" (Victory for India).

34. Other gifts from abroad included a gold and jade necklace given by King Farouk of Egypt, a writing desk from the Government of New Zealand and pieces from a Chinese porcelain dinner service printed with characters denoting "double joy" given by President Chiang Kai Shek of the Chinese Republic.

35. As well as jewellery from their close relatives, including the King and Queen, the couple received many useful items for the kitchen and home, including salt cellars from the Queen, a bookcase from Queen Mary, and a picnic case from Princess Margaret.

36. Other gifts, kindly made and given by members of the public, included a hand-knitted cardigan, two pairs of bed socks, and a hand-knitted tea cosy.

37. Over 200,000 people visited the special exhibition of wedding presents at St James's Palace.

THE WEDDING RECEPTION

38. The "wedding breakfast" was held after the marriage ceremony at Westminster Abbey in the Ball Supper-room at Buckingham Palace. The menu was Filet de Sole Mountbatten, Perdreau en Casserole, Bombe Glacee Princess Elizabeth.

39. The bride and groom sat at the main table with the bride's parents, King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, the bride's grandmother, Queen Mary, her sister Princess Margaret, the groom's mother, Princess Andrew of Greece, the groom's uncle, Prince George of Greece and the Kings of Norway, Denmark and Romania.

40. Individual posies of myrtle and white Balmoral heather were placed at each place setting as "favours" (gifts to the guests).

41. The flowers decorating the tables were pink and white carnations, donated by the British Carnation Society.

42. The string band of the Grenadier Guards played music during the "wedding breakfast" under the direction of Captain FJ Harris. The King's Pipe Major also played at the lunch.

43. The official wedding cake was made by McVities and Price. Eleven other cakes were given as presents. With post-war food rationing still in place ingredients were sent as wedding presents from overseas, for example the official cake was made using ingredients given as a wedding gift by Australian Girl Guides. Pieces of cake and food parcels were later distributed to schoolchildren and institutions.

44. The cake was nine feet high in four tiers, with painted panels of the armorial bearings of both families, and included the monograms of bride and groom, sugar-iced figures to depict their favourite activities, and regimental and naval badges. The cake was cut using the Duke's Mountbatten sword, which was a wedding present from the King.

45. United Biscuits, which now owns the former McVities and Price brand, will be making two cakes to mark the diamond wedding anniversary in 2007. The first of the cakes will be on display at the lunch for members of various Royal Families at Buckingham Palace after the Service of Thanksgiving at Westminster Abbey on the 19 November. The second cake will be distributed to members of staff.

THE HONEYMOON

46. The bride and bridegroom left the Palace showered with rose petals. For the Princess' going-away outfit, Hartnell designed an ensemble of a dress and matching coat in mist-blue with mushroom-coloured accessories.

47. The couple departed from Waterloo station with the Princess's corgi, Susan, for their honeymoon.

48. The newlyweds spent their wedding night at Broadlands in Hampshire, home of Prince Philip's uncle Earl Mountbatten. The second part of the honeymoon was spent at Birkhall on the Balmoral Estate.

MARRIED LIFE

49. Early in 1948 the couple leased their first marital home, Windlesham Moor, in Surrey, near Windsor Castle, where they stayed until they moved to Clarence House on 4 July 1949.

50. After marrying Princess Elizabeth, the Duke of Edinburgh continued his naval career, reaching the rank of Lieutenant-Commander in command of the frigate HMS Magpie.

51. Although he was the Queen's husband, the Duke of Edinburgh was not crowned or anointed at the Coronation ceremony in 1953. He was the first subject to pay Homage to Her Majesty, and kiss the newly crowned Queen by stating "I, Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, do become your liege man of life and limb, and of earthly worship; and faith and truth I will bear unto you, to live and die, against all manner of folks. So help me God."

52. Prince Philip has accompanied the Queen on all her Commonwealth tours and State visits, as well as on public engagements in all parts of the UK. The first of these was the Coronation tour of the Commonwealth from November 1953 to May 1954, when the couple visited Bermuda, Jamaica, Panama, Fiji, Tonga, New Zealand, Australia, Cocos Islands, Ceylon, Aden, Uganda, Libya, Malta and Gibraltar, travelling a distance of 43,618 miles.

53. The Duke of Edinburgh is only one of a few consorts to reigning female Queens in British history. William III was co-Sovereign with Mary II, although she, as daughter of James II, was nearer the throne than him. The husband of Queen Anne was not given the title of King, but remained Prince George of Denmark. Prince Albert was created Prince Consort by Queen Victoria in 1857.

54. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh have four children: Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales (b. 1948), Princess Anne, The Princess Royal (b. 1950), Prince Andrew, The Duke of York (b. 1960), and Prince Edward, The Earl of Wessex (b. 1964).

55. With the birth of Prince Andrew in 1960, the Queen became the first reigning Sovereign to give birth to a child since Queen Victoria, whose youngest child, Princess Beatrice, was born in 1857.

56. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh have seven grandchildren - Peter Phillips (b. 1977), Zara Phillips (b. 1981) Prince William (b. 1982), Prince Harry (b. 1984), Princess Beatrice (b. 1988), Princess Eugenie (b. 1990), and Lady Louise Windsor (b. 2003). The Earl and Countess of Wessex are expecting their second child in December.

57. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh celebrated their 6th wedding anniversary in the year of the coronation, with a dance at Clarence House given by Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. They left on their Commonwealth tour three days later.

ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATIONS

58. A service of thanksgiving was held in Westminster Abbey for both the Silver and Golden wedding anniversaries.

59. There will be a service of thanksgiving in Westminster Abbey on the 19 November 2007 to celebrate the Diamond Wedding Anniversary. On the 20 November, the day of their wedding anniversary, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh will travel to Malta where they lived as a young married couple from 1949-51 while the Duke was stationed there as a serving Royal Naval officer.

60. Five choristers who sang at the 1947 Wedding Service in Westminster Abbey will be serving at the Service of Thanksgiving on the 19 November, 2007 in Westminster Abbey.

Conservative leader David Cameron says there is more to life than making money, arguing that improving people's happiness is a key challenge for politicians.

The science of happiness poses huge questions for politicians.

Governments have succeeded in delivering greater and greater wealth but that has not translated into extra happiness.

Now research is suggesting ways in which societies might try to maximise well-being - ideas which often challenge some of the basic principles of modern life.

Increasingly, politicians from all sides are taking notice of the findings and discussing how they might capture the elusive feel-good factor.

Back in 1999, Tony Blair wrote about achieving "a better quality of life", adding: "Money isn't everything. But in the past governments have seemed to forget this.

"Success has been measured by economic growth - GDP - alone.

"Delivering the best possible quality of life for us all means more than concentrating solely on economic growth.

"That is why sustainable development is such an important part of this Government's programme.

"All this depends on devising new ways of assessing how we are doing."

The leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron told The Happiness Formula programme: "We should be thinking not just what is good for putting money in people's pockets but what is good for putting joy in people's hearts.

"When politicians are looking at issues they should be saying to themselves 'how are we going to try and make sure that we don't just make people better off but we make people happier, we make communities more stable, we make society more cohesive'."

Economics

The idea that politics should be about creating "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" goes back to the end of the 18th century and the philosopher Jeremy Bentham.

However, no-one could work out how to measure happiness, or how to weigh one person's happiness against how other people feel.

So economics, which is built on objective measurement, took hold instead.

In the past few years figures close to government in Britain have been arguing once again that policies should take account of how happy - or unhappy - they make people.

In 2002, The Prime Minister's Strategy Unit held a "life satisfaction" seminar in Whitehall discussing the implications of a "happiness" policy.

A few month's later, Downing Street published an "analytical paper" which considered how happiness might affect different policies including:

• A happiness index
• Teaching people about happiness
• More support for volunteering
• "A more leisured work-life balance"
• Higher taxes for the rich

  The authors were careful to say that the ideas were not government policy, but Tony Blair's policy adviser who helped write the paper, David Halpern, told The Happiness Formula it is inevitable that in future governments will be judged on their success in making people happy.

  "Put it this way, if government doesn't measure it, other people will and already are."

  Already one government department has defined its purpose as improving people's "health and happiness".

  The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is working on a happiness index.

  Furthermore, every local authority in England and Wales has wide-ranging powers to promote well-being.

  The Happiness Formula has been looking at how different politics would be if government tried to make people happy rather than just rich.

  Tax makes you happy

  Research has suggested that one of the key reasons why wealth has not translated into happiness is that we tend to compare ourselves with people who are richer than we are.

  As a result, even though we may be better off ourselves, we still do not get any happier.

  If we want a happier society, so the theory goes, we need to reduce the gap between rich and poor.

  And the way to do that is to redistribute wealth from the rich to the less well-off.

  So some close to government are now arguing that, believe it or not, taxes make us happy.

  "We tend to think of taxes as bad," said the PM's adviser David Halpern.

  "I know it's difficult for us to believe as we take out our chequebook at the end of the year, but it looks like, at least at a certain level, taxes are likely to increase the well-being of the population."

  The leading economist Professor Richard Layard of the LSE explains why: "We should try and discourage people from comparing themselves with other people ... and I think the tax system can help us in that way."

  Do not panic though - both Mr Halpern and Professor Layard reckon the current tax rates are about right for maximising happiness.

  Banning advertising

  The science of happiness suggests advertising is a major cause of unhappiness because it makes people feel less well-off.

  According to Professor Layard some advertising should be banned.

  "I don't see that we need to allow pictorial advertising which conveys very little information because it makes people feel poorer."

  In the remote Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan, where government makes policy on the basis of Gross National Happiness, most street advertising is banned - particularly when aimed at children.

  In the UK, the National Consumer Council is campaigning to ban advertising to children below the age of 10.

  "We already regulate alcohol to children, we should also regulate and I think ban advertising of junk food to children," said Ed Mayo, Chief Executive of the NCC.

  "There is no case, in terms of health or wellbeing of children for advertising like this."

  In fact, says Mr Mayo, the council's own research suggests advertising to children can make them more unhappy.

  "Children that are more brand aware, are more consumerist, came across as less satisfied in other parts of their lives - were unhappier".

  Commuting less

  According to scientists commuting is really bad news for happiness.

  Not only is the journey to and from work often a pretty miserable experience in itself, it has knock-on effects which limit the happiness of the rest of our lives.

  It appears that our happiness is closely linked to what researchers call our "social capital" - the sum of all our connections and trust in other people, our personal family ties, our friends, and our acquaintances.

  Professor Robert Putnam of Harvard University has calculated that every 10 minutes of commuting cuts all forms of social involvement by 10% - so 10% fewer family dinners, local club meetings, and other involvement.

  Once politicians encouraged us to "get on our bikes" and look for work.

  But the science of happiness suggests we might be better off staying close to our families and friends.

  There are implications for whether government should support communities where traditional industries have failed.

  Questions, too, for business and individuals as to whether they should move to new areas.

  It is arguable that planners and politicians should try to discourage people from living far from where they work.

  Encourage marriage

  The science of happiness suggests marriage is so good for your well-being that it adds an average seven years to the life of a man and something like four for a woman.

  To maximise happiness, it is argued, government should certainly do nothing to discourage marriage; arguably it should promote it.

  However, in Britain, any financial incentives to get married have been taken away.

  Politicians seem reluctant to make moral judgments about domestic relationships.

  "The married tend to be happier," said Mr Halpern.

  "In my view, it's not so much necessarily for government to say you therefore should be married, but it's perfectly reasonable [for the government] to say ... if you do these you'll probably be happy, if you do these you'll probably be miserable, you decide."

  Rethinking the health service

  Research also suggests there is a powerful link between happiness and health.

  It is suggested that making people happy could do more for the health of the nation than all the exercise, diet and anti-smoking campaigns rolled into one.

  And that argues for a big re-think in the priorities of the NHS.

  Policies aimed at making people happier - or at least less unhappy - should be encouraged in an effort to prevent people becoming ill in the first place.

  One idea is to massively increase access to a relatively new form of psychotherapy called CBT or cognitive behavioural therapy, which aims to help people avoid dwelling on negative thoughts and find ways to overcome them.

  Lord Layard, author of Happiness: lessons from a new science, believes the science is so conclusive the government should immediately employ another 10,000 therapists.

  "We're talking about for a course of CBT a thousand, £1500 with something that can change somebody's life.

  "It really is important that we should try and have a major nationally organised training programme for more therapists."

  Making people happy

  But just how far should a government go?

  In Bhutan they have banned a whole series of TV channels such as wrestling and MTV. The country has even banned plastic bags.

  One reason Bhutan has been able to take such dramatic steps is that it is run by an absolute monarchy.

  In the West, if politicians, acting in the name of happiness, were to impose bans and restrictions on people's freedom, governments would be more likely to encounter resistance.

  Some argue that the logic of happiness research would be the ultimate in nanny states - an argument the Prime Minister's strategy adviser is keen to contradict.

  "I'm sure lots of ministers would be nervous about that.

  "But it turns out that some of the key determinates of what make us happy, are things over which we as individuals have relatively little control about prevalent levels of community safety, they're safe when they go out.

  "How do other people in general behave, about the way in which our whole economy may be locked into a given path.

  "These are things that as individuals we can't determine, but we can determine as a society together, and that basically means government is in the game."

  Mark Easton presents The Happiness Formula series which is broadcast on BBC Two on Wednesdays at 1900BST.

In the brave new world of billionaire football owners and "galactico" star-players, international marketing clout increasingly plays as important a role as what happens on the pitch.

As Manchester United and Real Madrid have discovered, there is a huge audience in the Far East eager to be associated with top-flight European clubs and stars.

Liverpool, despite being a romantic, historic, and well-thought-of brand name, has seen itself fall behind in the high-powered world of overseas brand awareness, where others have been increasingly stealing a march.

The main reason for Manchester United's financial dominance in the UK is its huge fan base in the Far East, where it is estimated the club has nearly 17 million supporters.

And part of the lure of David Beckham for Real Madrid last summer was the enormous appeal he had to Asian supporters.

Now Liverpool is hoping to increase its presence and sales in that part of the world, with news that Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is hoping to clinch a deal to buy a 30% stake in the club.

There is a counter-offer from Liverpool-born construction magnate Steve Morgan, who has promised £73m investment, but the Thai premier has indicated he will not increase his £60m offer.

It is not yet clear whether any Thai money would come from his personal fortune or government coffers - but it could help kick-start a new Far East adventure for the club.

Although the source of any funding remains hazy, analysts, brand experts, and academics are all agreed it provides the Merseyside outfit with a great opportunity to improve both its on and off-field fortunes, although the two are linked.

'Falling behind'

Michael Stirling is head of pricing strategies, as part of the sports analysis team, at law firm Field Fisher Waterhouse.

He said: "There are two types of top teams in the modern game. There are those like Real Madrid, Chelsea and Manchester United who push their brand by buying quality players.

"And there are clubs who don't have access to the same amounts of funds, but have the skills, expertise and facilities still to compete on and off the field. A club such as Arsenal has these qualities and has made a few select buys for the future.

"Liverpool is falling outside this top bracket for two reasons; people want results now without having to wait for team development, and also the Premiership has become about much more than "football".

"It is about excitement, image, high-profile players, and marketing strategies. Liverpool have not moved with the times and need to be much more dynamic off the pitch.

"The £60m will not bring Liverpool up to Manchester United or Real Madrid's level, and Thailand is not the biggest market.

"However, this deal may be the first step towards a more dynamic approach and a restructuring both in terms of acquiring football ability and a higher brand profile."

'Star-driven market'

Lauren Henderson, director of brand analytics at FutureBrand, agrees there is work for Liverpool to do in terms of catching their rivals.

She said: "The job for Liverpool now is to try and step up to level of Manchester United in Far East, and see how much they can make from its brand in terms of shirt sales and perhaps sponsorship.

"One of the main driver of sales in the Far East is through star players, and, although Liverpool have Michael Owen, the money will allow them to bring in other big-name players and so increase their Asian presence."

Whether Liverpool will be allowed the luxury to use their Thai windfall merely to buy a big-name star for boosting off-field activities, is debatable.

As Anthony Grimes, a marketing lecturer at University of Hull specialising in football, observes: "In today's Premiership they need the money to be able to compete for third and fourth place, and a shot at Champions League football, never mind first place.

"The money might also be needed to help them with their move to a new stadium across Stanley Park."

'Merchandising push'

However Mr Grimes sees a marketing potential if it is Thai government money, and not private cash, used in the deal.

"Manchester United and Real Madrid have shown that there are marvellous marketing opportunities in the Far East.

"Liverpool has one million supporters in Thailand, and this could raise their profile even further and give an extra push to their merchandising.

"If it is Thai government money that is being used, it could lead to the nation as a whole identifying with Liverpool - it will become the club of the country, which increases marketing opportunities further.

"If they are successful on the playing field, there could be a cross-over in sales to other neighbouring countries and Liverpool could be seen as a standard bearer for Asian football."

However, as football analyst Vinay Bedi from Wise Speke points out: "They can only do so much off the field without winning trophies, which is something they need to start doing again."

And he warns: "It would be hugely advantageous if they were to receive this money without problems or complications."

On every indicator of bad behaviour - drugs, drink, violence, promiscuity - the UK was at or near the top, said the Institute for Public Policy Research.

The institute looked at the results of a number of studies of adolescents conducted in recent years.

The researchers believe the country's record can be explained by a collapse in family and community life in the UK.

Free time

Measured against German, French and Italian youngsters, British 15-year-olds are drunk more often and involved in more fights, and a higher proportion have had sex.

The institute says young Britons are marked out by how they spend their free time.

In England, 45% of 15-year-old boys spend most evenings out with their friends, and in Scotland the figure is 59%.

In France just 17% of boys spend their time in the same way.

On the other hand, European teenagers tend to sit down for meals with their parents far more often.

Some 93% of Italian teenagers eat regularly with their families; in the UK just 64% of 15-year-olds do the same.

'Structured interaction'

Nick Pearce, from IPPR, said these figures pointed to an "increasing disconnect" between children and adults.

He said youngsters were learning how to behave from one another instead of from adults.

"Because they don't have that structured interaction with adults, it damages their life chances," he said.

"They are not learning how to behave - how to get on in life - as they need to."

The researchers concluded that the lack of adult interaction has left British teenagers increasingly vulnerable to failure.

Brand awareness

One study looked at by the IPPR suggested 38% of British 15-year-olds in 2003 had tried cannabis - compared with 7% in Sweden and 27% in Germany.

Another said that in 2003 British 15-year-olds were the third worst binge-drinkers in Europe - only Denmark and Ireland were worse.

Britons are also more immersed in consumerism than American youngsters, the research claimed.

This was indicated by their brand awareness and the amount of importance they attached to consumer goods and possessions.

The IPPR's report is due to be published next week.

Fizzy drinks and unhealthy, sugar-laden snacks should not be advertised during television programmes for pre-school children, according to a Labour MP.

Debra Shipley says the images of burgers, biscuits, crisps and high fat nibbles can only contribute to the onset of obesity in later life.

Allowing the adverts to appear between programmes watched by the under-fives counters the government's efforts to encourage healthy eating, she says.

Now Ms Shipley hopes ministers will listen to her arguments and back her Children's Television (Advertising) Bill, which will outlaw food and drink advertising during pre-school children's TV programmes.

The Stourbridge MP, responsible for the Protection of Children Act 1999, is supported by more than 130 MPs, the National Heart Forum and Parents Jury, part of the Food Commission.

Marketing

"While I agree children should take more exercise, they should also be careful about what they put in their mouths," says Ms Shipley, whose bill will be heard on 6 May.

"I would like to see all food and drink adverts banned during pre-school programmes.

"We are talking about foods that are high in fat, sugar and salt - value added products that make the most money.

"Children develop an interest in that particular sort of food - that is why it is being advertised. It's about brand awareness that may last for the rest of their lives. Whatever brand it is, it is bad.

"Advertisers will say they don't know who is watching the programmes, but their marketing people have a very clear idea."

Ms Shipley says a sample group of parents she asked to monitor the advertising between pre-school programmes were "absolutely appalled at what they found".

Healthy eating

"They couldn't believe the enormous amount of advertising for food and drink," she says.

"There was no chance of parental control. Children were being bombarded with the stuff.

"I am very concerned about this because we have an increasing problem of childhood obesity and diabetes."

Ms Shipley says she has taken this argument to Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell and Health Secretary Alan Milburn, but has been disappointed with their response.

"The Department of Health is currently running a programme to encourage healthy eating in children which I think is being entirely undermined by this advertising," she says.

"I pointed this out to both secretaries of state and nothing is being done about it.

"I have been very disappointed because this is a very serious issue."

'Considerable problem'

A spokeswoman for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport said it would be "inappropriate" to comment without knowing the contents of the bill.

But she said: "We do agree that any form of broadcast advertised when children are most likely to be watching needs to be done responsibly."

The Department of Health was unavailable for comment.

But Jane Landon, associate director of the National Heart Forum - an alliance of over 40 national organisations working to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease in the UK - said Ms Shipley had identified "a considerable problem".

"I think she's got a very good point. We don't want the current marketing trends to undermine the healthy eating initiatives, like the school fruit scheme, like the five a day programme," said Ms Landon.

"About 90% of what is being advertised during these programmes is foods that are very high in fat, salt and sugar.

"I think there is an ethical consideration about whether it is appropriate to be advertising to children that young, particularly as we know it has an effect on their choices and dietary patterns."

'Toy shop'

Kath Dalmeny, research officer for the Food Commission (FC), said its Parents Jury (PJ) of over 1,300 parents believed the advertising ban should be extended to all children's programmes, regardless of the age of young viewers.

"Advertisers do not focus on the food, they talk about the free toys, games, excitement, bright colours and adventure, so very positive values are being associated with these products," said Ms Dalmeny.

"Parents say the child really wants to take part in the adventure or wants the toy.

"One parent reported that her four-year-old child thought a burger bar was a toy shop."

Ms Dalmeny said fast food tended to be "extremely high in fat", with a single portion containing double the salt a child should have in a single day.

Some breakfast cereals contained 30-40% sugar, with juice drinks containing five to six spoonfuls of sugar, but as little as 5% fruit juice, she said.

"Getting used to that kind of diet means children are then prone to heart disease and cancers in later life."

The withdrawal of the HSBC bank as a potential title sponsor has left GBR Challenge in a race against time to raise funds for a new campaign.

But Dunstone is working on an idea to use GBR Challenge as a vehicle for a leading humanitarian charity.

"It has been well received and has changed people's thinking," he said.

The plan is to offer naming rights to the charity and then to offer other sponsorship opportunities to commercial companies.

Dunstone told The Sunday Times: "The idea we are trying to get across is to use the team and the America's Cup to do something positive.

"From a company's point of view it ticks a lot of their boxes - corporate social responsibility, humanitarian work and brand awareness in one package."

GBR Challenge was bankrolled by multi-millionaire Peter Harrison for the last America's Cup in 2002 to the tune of £25m.

The team finished seventh out of nine but Harrison was keen to preserve the legacy he had created and pledged to donate 50% of the projected £40m projected funds needed for Valencia in 2007.

Harrison spent 18 months trying to woo backers and HSBC seemed set to provide substantial funds before pulling out 10 days ago, prompting Dunstone to act.

"I've always said I would never be the guy to just write a cheque for an America's Cup because it's incredibly expensive," he told the paper.

"But Peter has created an amazing legacy and it would be a tragedy if it was to just disappear.

"I'm convinced the America's Cup is going to be the hottest property in Europe, even by 2006."

But GBR Challenge are aware time is running out - the later a team leaves it, the later they are able to look at signing top crews and develop their boats, sails and equipment.

Six syndicates have so far confirmed their participation in Valencia, with a handful of others expected to sign up before the April 2005 deadline.

"If we don't do this now, we will never have a chance to be a top team," said Leslie Ryan, the team's marketing boss

"We need to have the boats ready to race by March."
]]> http://irsgovernmen2000.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/bbc-news-programmes-moneybox-transcripts-jan01_july01-money-box-saturday-7-april-2001/ Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:26:25 +0000 Onijp http://irsgovernmen2000.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/bbc-news-programmes-moneybox-transcripts-jan01_july01-money-box-saturday-7-april-2001/ Tuesday, 10 April, 2001, 14:55 GMT 15:55 UK Money Box - Saturday 7 April 2001
THIS TRANSCRIPT IS ISSUED ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS TAKEN FROM A LIVE PROGRAMME AS IT WAS BROADCAST. THE NATURE OF LIVE BROADCASTING MEANS THAT NEITHER THE BBC NOR THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROGRAMME CAN GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PRINTED HERE.

Tape Transcript by JANE TEMPLE

MONEY BOX

Presenter: Paul Lewis

TRANSMISSION 7th APRIL 2001 1200-1230 RADIO 4

War Pensioner Benefits Cuts

Barclays Bank Branch Closures

Stakeholder Pensions

Changing Foreign Currency

Minimum Income Guarantee

ANNOUNCER : Now it's four minutes past twelve and time for MONEY BOX with Paul Lewis.

LEWIS Hello. In today's programme war pensioners face hardship as one council slashes help with their housing costs. Money Box is told other councils may follow suite. A year after Barclays closed 171 branches we look at the consequences for local people:

MAN Less people pass the door - less trade through the door, less money in the till. I suppose I've lost 10-15% of overall trade.

LEWIS How small firms are trying to cope with the new stakeholder pensions. The disappearing dollars if you're with the Woolwich and major changes in benefits start on Monday. All that in Money Box today. First though the Royal British Legion is warning that concessions on rent and council tax which help thousands of war pensioners and widows could be under threat after the London Borough of Harrow decided to stop the rebates from May. War pensioners in the borough will lose on average nearly £1700 a year each. At the moment the council takes no account of their war pensions when it works out entitlement to help with rent and council tax. Almost every council in Britain does the same but councillors in Harrow North London have decided to withdraw this help leading to large rises in the rent and council tax for the 53 war widows and pensioners in the borough. Dorothy's husband was killed in l944 and she told me her reaction to the council's plans:

DOROTHY I felt very angry because I feel that a lot of these people that are sitting behind the desks, I maybe wrong, but I feel that most of them probably weren't even born during the war so they don't know what we suffered and how we had to struggle. They haven't a clue what us older war widows went through.

LEWIS Tell me about your husband, about what happened?

DOROTHY He was transferred from the Somerset light infantry to the Blackwatch and sent over to Italy. I didn't even get the official telegram that everybody else got -I got just got a little bit of paper saying we regret to inform you your husband was killed on the 9th July.

LEWIS And were you alone ever since then?

DOROTHY I've been on my own ever since yes, yes. My - my daughter died last year unfortunately so I'm on my own completely now, there you are. No that's what makes me so angry about this see because I feel that they don't realise what we had to go through.

LEWIS If they go ahead with it how much difference will it make to you each week?

DOROTHY If it means paying the rent it's £50 - 58.79 is it? And then of course all the community tax as well.

LEWIS So that's £58.79 a week plus the council tax? Will you be able to afford that?

DOROTHY I shouldn't think so. Well if I did it would mean going without food and what have you cos there's nothing left - there will be nothing left.

LEWIS But Harrow council says it had no choice. Keith Toms is deputy leader at the Labour controlled council. He has voted twice to cut the benefits paid to Dorothy and the 52 other war widows and war pensioners:

TOMS It's not an economy that we look at with a great deal of pleasure, but on the other hand when you come to consider that there are 53 people that are in receipt of £88,000 from the borough then you know this might mean that we can employ 4 school teachers or 4 social workers so we really have had to look at the budget very hard this time. You can put up your list of priorities and say what you think, but we've had to make some harsh decisions.

LEWIS No I appreciate that but you seem to have picked on one of the poorest groups and one of the worst groups to pick to take away £58 a week in the case of Dorothy and an average of £1660 a year from 53 people. Why pick on 53 of the poorest people who suffered in the last war rather than other areas where you could save money?

TOMS Well the actual grant is not means tested - well can you say to me what should we do? - abolish meals on wheels? cut clothing grants to children going to school? Those are the decisions we've had to make. They are hard decisions.

LEWIS But of 353 councils in England and Wales only 6 penalise war pensioners like what you're planning to do, and all of them are Labour councils?

TOMS Well in that case we are in a position where we've had to make some decisions. We need to get to the stage where I believe it shouldn't be left at the discretion of local authorities - however small that number is. We need to have a national agreement on this. We will be approaching our MPs and we will be lobbying as hard as we can along with the British Legion to make sure there is some consistency nationally.

LEWIS Harrow councillors will have one more chance to vote on this decision at the full council meeting on May 1st. If they go ahead with the cuts the Royal British Legion is warning that other councils may follow suite, reversing a trend of recent years which has seen this concession become almost universal. Tom House, the Legion's head of pensions, says this is not just about the war pensioners in Harrow:

HOUSE 53 people are 53 people who have given either their spouses up to their country to defend it or indeed they've lost their health because of it. If we let down these 53 people it will snowball and we would have let down thousands. I think this is the thin end of the wedge, and I believe that if we let this go then other councils will follow suit and we've let everybody down who served us and defended this country from the last war onwards.

LEWIS Do you have any sympathy with the council? - they're facing a big rise in the council tax anyway - they have to save money. I think they're saving around five and a half million pounds. This is part of those savings. Do you have any sympathy with the - the difficulties they have?

HOUSE Would they be sitting there making those decisions if it wasn't for the people that were sent out during the last war to save our country as it is now? - the answer is no.

LEWIS Tom House from the Royal British Legion and as I said the final decision on that will be made by Harrow on May 1st. Now it's exactly a year today since Barclays Bank caused an outcry when it closed 171 branches in small towns and villages across the country. There were claims that communities would be destroyed, customers wouldn't be able to manage and businesses would go bust. 12 months on Money Box's Martin Stott has been to one of the communities made bankless by Barclays to find out how life's changed:

STOTT I'm standing outside the old Barclays Bank in Stotfold, about 15 miles south of Bedford. 12 months on the sign in the window warning people of this bank's closure still remains to taunt angry locals like Isabel Collier who spent a week on this pavement last year leading a doomed campaign to save the branch:

COLLIER Well I think we got nearly 1300 signatures in a week. I have to admit most people do use the machine - that was what they were coming for but a lot of people were inside the bank.

BRIAN That's a map of Stotfold - the large area in here is for 640 houses

STOTT Isabel's husband Brian is chairman of Stotfold town council. This is quite a sizeable community - it's home to Motorola's UK head office. There are a couple of schools, 4 take-aways and 7 pubs. 8,000 people live here and Brian Collier says housing developments approved by the council will increase that by half as much again in 5 years. He believes that in withdrawing Barclays has snubbed a good business opportunity and he claims his worst fears about the damage the bank's closure would have on other businesses have proved true too.

BRIAN An electrical shop has closed down, a toy shop has closed, a newsagents has closed down and immediately prior to that a greengrocers closed as well.

STOTT It's hard to say for sure just how much the bank's departure impacted on the businesses that are no more in Stotfold, but Ian Boscul who owns the fish and chip shop next door to Barclays has certainly suffered:

BOSCUL Apart from the sheer inconvenience now of having to go out and do my banking in what would normally be my dinner break, it's also affected my business that less people pass the door, less trade through the door, less money in the till. I suppose I've lost 10-15% of overall trade.

STOTT Since Barclays closed the local post office has stepped up its facilities and now cashes and banks cheques, but not for business accounts. Alan Farquharson runs a small industrial engraving firm. Like Ian Boscul he now has to bank in Letchworth, 4 miles away:

FARQUHARSON 2 months after they went we lost our car - it was stolen, so we now have to go up on the bus which is over a 2 hour round trip - £2.40 a time and the bus is full of people going up to the bank.

STOTT And it's not just the inconvenience and security risks that these people are complaining about. The community's found an unexpected additional problem: a money circulation crisis. Behind me is the supermarket which offers a popular cash back service for shoppers - many of whom then pop across the road to Jill Shepherd's knitting and craft shop.

SHEPHERD From a shopkeeper's point of view we have a great deal of trouble because we get £20 notes more often than we want to because there's a great shortage of £5 notes and quite often £10 notes because various pensions, cash back and everything is paid in the high notes. So we have a change problem too.

STOTT Barclays was the last of 3 major banks to close in this town, but the building still remains, unused and housing a busy temporary cash machine. Locals say it's regularly empty but at least it's there - until Barclays decides to dispose of the building for good. The hope people in Stotfold are clinging to now is that the building will be reopened as a new community bank run by a neutral agent providing a counter service on behalf of all the banks. Ian Boscul says it's just what communities like Stotfold need.

BOSCUL Well I think it would be excellent. I'm sure there's a lot of people in particular the small businesses in Stotfold would welcome it - even if it's not next door, at least it's within the same town and you're only away from your business for just a few minutes to attend to things rather than this - this trek across the country to do what you need to do.

LEWIS Ian Boscul ending Martin Stott's picture of life in Stotfold, one year after Barclays. And as we heard they're still hoping a community bank might be the answer. Well Money Box's Chris Acourt is with me. Chris, could community banks be the answer to these bankless areas?

ACOURT Well some hope is still alive on that Paul. It could just happen. Of the 171 branches Barclays closed a year ago the bank told me this week that it still owns 49 of the now empty buildings. Some could be used for community banks. Barclays withdrew some properties from auction with that thought in mind. Community banks becoming a reality depends largely though on whether the whole banking industry gives the idea the thumbs up. An announcement is due soon and if the response is positive then campaigners want around 20 pilot projects to be set up all around the country, including one in Stotfold.

LEWIS Thanks Chris. One to keep our eye on. Now the new stakeholder pensions started on Friday, and in 6 months time almost every business with 5 or more staff will have to offer one to them. But many small employers are finding the process a bit daunting. Rob Higginson is typical of the bosses who've contacted Money Box - he runs Soils Limited, an environmental engineering consultancy with 14 employees. He knows the regulations mean he has to do something, but he doesn't know exactly what, when or how. So I took financial advisor Alistair Conway from Conway Clarke to meet Rob Higginson at his Epsom office.

CONWAY Rob, nice to meet you - Alistair Conway from Clarke Conway.

HIGGINSON Rob Higginson - Soils Ltd - shall we try and find an office and

CONWAY Maybe I can answer some of those questions you had

HIGGINSON Okay - okay. Basically what is a stakeholder pension?

CONWAY A very simple low cost pension facility

HIGGINSON What as an employer do I have to do?

CONWAY You need to offer access to that scheme via the pay roll system at work. You haven't got to pay anything into the scheme.

HIGGINSON We don't have to make a contribution but we can make a contribution?

CONWAY If you want to, that will be welcomed I've no doubt by your employees, but there's no obligation under the legislation for you to do so.

HIGGINSON What will be involved in making pay roll deductions?

CONWAY It really is a case of deducting a net payment off net salaries for employees and passing on a cheque to an insurance company.

HIGGINSON So is the pension owned as it were by the employee or by the employer - is it a company scheme or is it an employee's?

CONWAY It's very much a collection of individual employee contracts. You are acting as a collection point for contributions from the employees to pass on to the insurer providing the scheme.

HIGGINSON Okay what sort of time scales are involved?

CONWAY Need to be set up from April 6th onwards and your latest completion date is the 8th October, but I think the key thing here is to make this a positive exercise not a negative exercise. You as an employer setting something up pro-actively rather than looking as though you're rushing to meet the deadline for legislation which is in October.

HIGGINSON What if some of my employees actually have existing pension schemes?

CONWAY Employees will have a need to seek advice about whether or not they'd be better off staying with the arrangements they've already got or setting up their own stakeholder plan independent of your company or joining the company scheme. Now they'll either have to get that advice off an independent advisor separate from you or you as an employer might decide to offer that service to your employees. That's up to you.

HIGGINSON What if my employees decide they don't want to partake in a stakeholder pension?

CONWAY They are free to choose to join it or not. All you must do is provide access, provide the facility.

LEWIS I've been listening into this conversation between you two and one of the things that strikes me is that what you haven't asked Rob is how you choose a scheme. Have you given any thought to that?

HIGGINSON Not as such. As they're fixed charges I guess - are there better schemes? - worse schemes or whatever?

CONWAY Well I think historically if you'd gone through this exercise one of the biggest parts of the debate would have been about comparing charges between contracts. I think that differential is going to be much smaller in future and it's going to be about picking schemes that are well administered by the insurance company who's providing it and about companies who've got good fund performance.

HIGGINSON I thought charges were fixed. I thought it was 1% - I seem to recall

CONWAY The upper 1% limit is fixed as a maximum, but it's clear that some insurers are choosing to go in at a lower level than the 1% or some are discounting as the funds get bigger.

LEWIS What about costs? - I mean there are fixed management charges but you're going to make a charge to Rob to sort all this out for him. He is going to face expenses initially?

CONWAY Yes he's either got to decide that he bears the cost of that himself by doing the homework himself or he comes to somebody who is independent who will go around the market. We would normally charge a fee for doing an initial consultation and research of the market and then stages of fees for doing presentations to the staff, individual one to one meetings, and if Rob as an employer wants to pay for advising the employees on choices that they've got in relation to existing plans they've got, again that's something we can indicate costs to him for.

HIGGINSON What sort of scale are we looking at? - what sort of fees are we?

CONWAY Typically for a company of 20/25 staff we're finding the fees run somewhere between £1500 and £2000 for that initial set up and advice process.

LEWIS Is that a price you'd be willing to pay or would you rather do all the work yourself?

HIGGINSON I think for a smallish business £1500 represents quite a large expenditure to getting what appears to be precious little?

CONWAY As with everything people have got to make a judgement of whether they feel any fee charged by any professional justifies the cost saving to them of not spending their time going around the market. Personally if I went into a field which I wasn't familiar with, I would want the reassurance of knowing that I'd gone to somebody who spends all their time working in that area to provide me with a final recommendation and certainly a lot of employers we've spoken to quite like the idea of the responsibility of the choice of the provider resting with somebody else other than them.

LEWIS That was Alistair Conway of Clarke Conway and we'll be seeing how Rob Higginson gets on with stakeholder pensions over the next few months and there are plenty of links and contacts about stakeholders on our website - details of that later. How would you feel if you'd paid a cheque into your bank and half of it disappeared in charges? Well that's what happened to one Money Box listener when he got a cheque from the USA and Chris Acourt's got more details - Chris:

ACOURT Yes Paul, this is how one man lost over half of the value of a cheque which he paid into a British bank - the Woolwich. Dr. Lindsay Bashford told us he was astonished when he paid in a cheque written out for $175 American dollars - worth around £120 and received an American Express cheque in return worth just £58. He'd been charged over £60 for the conversion from US to UK currency.

BASHFORD They have collected their £7.50 charge but they had also paid on our behalf a foreign bank charge of £52.75 and so together it came to more than half of the value of the cheque

ACOURT What we found is that the Woolwich is unique in having an arrangement with American Express to convert customer's dollars cheques to Sterling. There's a minimum £7.50 charge but American Express also passes on the fees that the American bank issuing the cheque makes as part of the conversion process. Woolwich customers end up paying for the lot, though the Woolwich itself doesn't take a cut.

LEWIS Well Chris the high charges were a shock for this listener but surely Woolwich could have warned him how much it might cost?

ACOURT Well both Woolwich and American Express told us that they can never predict what the American banks will charge each time - in this case it was the First National Bank of Maryland.

LEWIS And could Lindsay Bashford have saved money by joining a different bank if he needs to pay in more dollar cheques for examples - Barclays maybe?

ACOURT Yes, Barclays which now owns the Woolwich would charge a £9, but banks charges and policies do vary a great deal. The cheapest for converting Dr. Bashford's value of cheque we found to be HSBC with a flat fee charge of £6 for its customers - Lloyds would have charged its customers £8 but also passes on the charges made by the cheque issuing banks, so it's another place to tread very carefully if you don't want to end up paying dearly for the cheque conversion service and results from our charges survey are on the website and with our audience line.

LEWIS Details of those later, but Chris is Woolwich changing its policies?

ACOURT The bank says it's now looking into whether it can adopt the same charges and procedures as Barclays but it isn't happening yet. Money Box has got a result for Dr. Bashford though - the Woolwich told us it will refund the £60 he lost because it accepts it wasn't - he wasn't made fully aware of just how high the charges might be. So naturally we've passed on the good news:

BASHFORD I'm pleased about that but I think they probably really should draw their attention to customers - that there's the possibility of when they cash a foreign cheque through their mechanism of very much larger charges.

LEWIS Yes not so much the wonder of Woolwich as the wonder of Money Box I think there Chris. Anyway thanks for that. From Monday at least 100,000 people over 60 will be able to get a boost in their income from the government if they apply for it. The government's minimum income guarantee is being improved with higher weekly amounts and much easier rules on savings. To explain the changes let's talk to Sarah Sulley a welfare rights expert with Birmingham City Council. Sarah these are big changes. Just explain exactly what they are?

SULLEY The system itself is much simplified. There's only going to be one rate in essence whereas there were three before. What it means is that people can have a much higher income level and still be entitled to the minimum income guarantee top up and also the savings limits have been increased dramatically.

LEWIS So what sort of income can you get help up to?

SULLEY If you've got any income - if you're a single person and your income is below £92.15 a week then you can get a top up to that figure and if you're a couple the figure is £140.55.

LEWIS So these are way above the basic retirement pension aren't they?

SULLEY That's the very important point. We found when minimum income guarantee was introduced that many people were confused and expected to get this as their state retirement pension. It is something that they have to apply to - to get.

LEWIS And we also know don't we that around half a million pensioners who could claim this don't do so. Now there's another £100,000 maybe more who can get it. Why aren't they applying?

SULLEY There are lots of reasons. In Birmingham we run particular campaigns to try and encourage people to claim these benefits. We know we've got around 18,000 before these changes and another 4,000 as a result of the changes. We see various things being brought to us - most important perhaps is the stigma that people still associate with claiming a means tested benefit.

LEWIS And how do people do it? - is it a difficult process?

SULLEY The form isn't exactly easy. There are lots of places that you can go to get help. But basically it's a question of filling in the form, giving details of what income you already have, providing the evidence for that income and then waiting to see if you qualify. Really the easiest way to discover whether you're entitled to a top up in this way is to make the claim.

LEWIS And of course these exchanges also extend entitlement to help with your rent and help with your council tax don't they?

SULLEY That's very, very important. You only have to have a few pence coming into you through this minimum income guarantee scheme to get full help with your rent and council tax. And then also for things like funeral expenses payments should you need them later.

LEWIS Now I know a lot of other changes start on Monday. Briefly, what are they?

SULLEY They're have been quite dramatic increases in such things as carer's premium. There's the introduction of the new bereavement premium which won't actually come on stream till next year because bereavement allowance will come in before that. They're quite complicated so I would advise anybody to get help to work their way through the system.

LEWIS Sarah Sulley thanks very much