Michael Marten's micro-blog

Given that on a national level the LibDems have basically shown themselves to be Tories, being free of them can only be a good thing...

...is that it feels completely normal to do things that some other people might think rather strange.  For example, for many years I have been adding to my collection of old missionary biographies and related items.  I've acquired them from church books sales, charity shops, some very strange second-hand bookshops; I've been given some, and some... I don't know quite where they have come from.

This would be regarded as a bit weird by many people, but I have finally managed to use many of them in one go!  It's - sadly - very exciting for me, not least since I collect a number of things that seem rather pointless to others (including some members of my own household...).  Now I have a journal article written that uses a fair number of these books.  What is the article about?  Funny you should ask - it's about mission biographies as a genre, and how they were used to create 'Protestant saints'.

Here's a small selection of some of my books, including most of the ones that were used:

Here is the text of a letter I wrote to HMRC yesterday, requesting a meeting to discuss paying less tax.

My request follows the example offered by Goldman Sachs: if they can negotiate lower taxes over lunch, I don't see why I shouldn't be able to do so.  Clearly, the government's talk of austerity etc. can't be right if large amounts of tax can be waived over a lunch, and so we should all be able to pay less tax than the calculations offered by tax officials and accountants suggest.

I am, of course, very happy to pay my fair share of taxes, but the word 'share' is key: it presupposes that others will also pay their fair share.  If they are allowed to pay less, then I should be allowed to do so too.

Dear Madam/Sir,

National Insurance number: XXXXXXXXX

Following recent news reports, I am writing to request a reconsideration of my tax affairs.

I understand that representatives of the Goldman Sachs bank recently arranged a lunch with the director of HMRC and negotiated lower tax payments for themselves.  If such high-income entities are permitted to pay less tax on the basis of a lunch with the director of HMRC, clearly the government does not need as much tax income as both the media and my tax liabilities in recent years have led me to believe it does.

The basis of the UK’s taxation system is loosely based on a progressive ideal – higher incomes result in higher taxes and lower incomes result in lower taxes.  Therefore, if a high-income entity like Goldman Sachs is entitled to pay less tax than the relevant calculations suggest they should, it is only logical that I will also be entitled to pay less tax than the relevant calculations indicate.  Presumably HMRC will want to treat all taxpayers fairly and you will therefore be inclined to acquiesce to my request for lower tax liabilities; this means we simply need to come to an agreement about the new level of taxes I should now be paying.  Following the Goldman Sachs example, I presume we should discuss this over a lunch, and I am therefore writing to arrange this.

I should point out that as I am in full-time employment, on PAYE, and earn less than the 40% higher-tax threshold, my tax affairs have hitherto been fairly simple.  As I expect the director of HMRC to be very busy with the complex tax affairs of high-income individuals and companies taking up most of his lunch-times, I would not expect him to be able to meet with me personally.

However, I would be happy to meet with another representative of HMRC to discuss reducing my taxes.  Also, as my tax affairs are so straightforward, I would tentatively like to suggest that a full lunch might not be necessary: a quick coffee and cake would probably allow sufficient time to discuss the reduced taxes I would like to be paying in the coming year.  Whilst this would free up HMRC staff to engage more fully with other taxpayers, if HMRC policy is that such arrangements can only be discussed over a lunch, I am happy to identify a suitable (vegetarian) establishment.

Please contact me to arrange a meeting.  It would suit me rather well if we could meet before mid-February, and, of course, I would be most grateful if a meeting could be arranged near to where I live.

I should add that I imagine some of my friends and colleagues might be interested in making similar arrangements.  I am therefore posting the text of this letter to my blog, and would expect to post your response and the outcome of our meeting online too.  Perhaps this will help them in arranging their reduced tax liabilities.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Happy New Year, everyone!

I'm not sure where this comes from (so apologies for copyright infringement), but it's a very good image.

I have a Mamiya 645 ProTL with the prism viewfinder and the motor-drive.  There are two battery power sources: one small 6.5V cell in the main body, and 6AA cells in the motor-drive.

The meter and the shutter are, as I understand it, operated from the small 6.5V cell, whilst the AA cells are just for the motor-drive.  I almost always take multiple spot readings with my Sekonic meter, relying only rarely on the camera's meter (basically, when I think the AV measurement will be sufficient - I've found the spot meter to be slightly off, and I trust my Sekonic meter more), but last week the camera meter just stopped working altogether.  This has happened a couple of times before, and I'm beginning to wonder if there's some kind of reason for/pattern to this, and if others have experienced the same thing.

I replaced the 6.5V cell (I had a new spare in the camera bag) and that had no effect.  I then, despite being fairly sure this would have no effect, also replaced the AA cells with new ones - I was right, this didn't make it work either.  Strangely, the shutter seemed to work just fine, and the battery check light for all combinations of battery was also ok.

When I came home, I tested all the batteries with a multimeter and they were all fine (so I put the old ones back in!).  I took the prism viewfinder off the camera body and there was no debris or dirt visible that would impact on the electrical contacts.  When I reattached it and tried the meter again, it flickered, and then worked.  I thought this meant a loose contact between the prism meter and the camera body but have checked this multiple times and it is all really firmly held together, so I don't think it is dirt/loose contacts between the body and the viewfinder.  If there is internal damage to the contacts, I'll have a hard time fixing that, but if there's another explanation, I'd like to know more.

Anyone have any ideas why this might be happening?  If you know anything about this - particularly how to avoid it happening! - do please share, either in the comments, or by email here.

Thank you very much for your help!