11.50 GMT -- sitting, killing time watching reruns of SNL's Palin (what on earth possessed McCain to do the QVC stunt?).... V Heavy polling in VA according to locals on the ground.... waiting for first results to come through .... Jeremy Vine playing with his graph again... we have to wait for 6.00 for Alaska ..don't think can stay up for that and still make it to my nine o'clock tomorrow...
11.57 -- three minutes to go - to something... .. JV running through obscure counties... David D trying to explain how networks forecast the results...claim that exit polls have Dem bias... laying off blame on ABC as BBC's affiliate.
midnight .. bonfire night in England... -- KY to McC; VT to BO....now cut to filler about Martin Luther King and I had better do some exercises....or revert to watching Tina Fey. Bizarre to think that BO was born six years before the Supreme Court struck down miscegenation laws. 12.10 more discussion on race.... Dem win VA Senate. does that mean BO will win VA? Eric reckons that would be very good news for him - and he is a politics professor. Short tutorial now on separation of powers. Cheney's ex press sec already discussing BO's first 100 days. and now we have Ricky Gervais from New York. They wouldn't do this in the UK.
1.00 am -- PA to Obama -- allegedly... so we finally have a result that appears to matter.. MC chances "pretty darn minimal"...and Jed Bartlett's NH has stayed blue...BO now ahead.... chancs of goign to bed at some point looking better...IL to BO -- and DC finally gets to matter..... plus MA... and DL...suddenly 67 votes ,,, but TN to Mc. Results in now... but so far BO has not taken any Bush states.
1.15 -- Liddy Dole out in NC -- Kathy will be pleased.... saying how much NC has changed ... Raleigh Durham just described as starbucks belt....
1.45 and while I was asleep the popular vote projection which Beeb pundit said could only go in ob direction has just narrowed down fto 50+50 -- that can't be true..better stay awake.
1.50 -- VA seems to have disappeared off the political map... no mention for a couple of hours...
2.05 -- final news that Fox has called OH for BO... finally a state might change from 2004....GA gone to McC - despite the fact that BC won it in 1992....they are saying v close ... DD has finally said that White House ha sliped form Republican grasp -- might be bedtime.
2.35 -- debating whether am going to go to bed or wait up for FL.... getting quite dopey now.
2.40 -- Simon Schama trying to get DavidD to call the election for Obama...Ben Wildavsky - my token republican friend - has told me its all over from McC with PA and OH gone... I think I am going to sign off.... but can't get as excited as I did over Bill C.... I wonder whether I would have done if Hillary had been running...
Tuesday 4 November 2008
Monday 3 November 2008
Bad planning
You have 64 quarters of economic growth in which to open your mega-mall and then choose to open in the quarter when recession is likely to be confirmed... such is the fate of the vast new shopping centre at Shepherds Bush which I, along with most of West London visited on Saturday. As others have already commented, it already seems like a temple to a bygone age - so early 2000s - and an odd juxtaposition with Fiona Reynolds calling for people to reconnect with their simpler, non-consumerist selves on the radio that morning - by visiting the conspicuous consumption of the wealthy of an earlier age.
But good to know that, in a corner of W12 there is a place where, with no need to take more than five steps, you can buy Gucci, Prada, stock up with diamonds at Tiffany's (or is that a breakfast place). Notable that there were a lot of people in cafés; long lines to buy England shirts at £ 3.49 at Sports Direct (90% off - get donw there fast) - but not a single high end bag to be seen in the sticky paw of any of the thronging masses.
So is this completely misconceived? Quite possibly. Though once you have made it through the offputting designer village for people valet parking their Porsches and SUVs, there are some more normal stores where the tills may some day ring. And compared to Oxford Street, with about half the number of people, there would be more space to move about and no need to dodge between the lines of buses to get from one row to another. Time will tell whether this becomes a monumental folly. The verdict of a non-random sample at the tennis club in Sunday afternoon was that all had been and none would go back - to which I was the only possible exception (but at my rate of spend that won't make a decent return on £1.6bn this side of the next millennium).
But if not misconceived, it is stunningly badly planned. Not just because the tube station dumps you out by the bus station - not into the mall (the whole point is surely to avoid any risk of exposure to fresh air). Not just because the escalators inside the mall can't cope with people wanting to go both up and down. Not just that the refurbished Shepherds Bush tube has nice white tiles, but seems to have no increased access to cope with - duh - Monroe people. Not just because nothing has been done to make traffic move around Shepherds Bush green. Will any of the people who flocked there on Saturday to then be held in a queue outside the tube station closed for congestion in pouring rain - and who then could not get a bus either - ever bother to make it back?
Of course Saturday was exceptional. It was new. It was horrible weather. But there seems to be a complete mismatch between the assumptions on which Westfield was built -- vast numbers of people arriving from all over London - and the ability of the transport system to plan on anything like a comparable basis. But you wait 11 years for a mega-mall to be built (reassuring that these people are building the shopping mall for the Olympic village) and then you spend two hours in the rain trying to get away from it.
But that is not the only problem with the development... it is literally all shops and a few restaurants. No homes. No offices.
In short it is a monument to American suburban planning. Giant mall; inadequate public transport; single use. Disconnected from the local community. A potential blight on other local high streets. Jane Jacobs would be turning in her grave....
But good to know that, in a corner of W12 there is a place where, with no need to take more than five steps, you can buy Gucci, Prada, stock up with diamonds at Tiffany's (or is that a breakfast place). Notable that there were a lot of people in cafés; long lines to buy England shirts at £ 3.49 at Sports Direct (90% off - get donw there fast) - but not a single high end bag to be seen in the sticky paw of any of the thronging masses.
So is this completely misconceived? Quite possibly. Though once you have made it through the offputting designer village for people valet parking their Porsches and SUVs, there are some more normal stores where the tills may some day ring. And compared to Oxford Street, with about half the number of people, there would be more space to move about and no need to dodge between the lines of buses to get from one row to another. Time will tell whether this becomes a monumental folly. The verdict of a non-random sample at the tennis club in Sunday afternoon was that all had been and none would go back - to which I was the only possible exception (but at my rate of spend that won't make a decent return on £1.6bn this side of the next millennium).
But if not misconceived, it is stunningly badly planned. Not just because the tube station dumps you out by the bus station - not into the mall (the whole point is surely to avoid any risk of exposure to fresh air). Not just because the escalators inside the mall can't cope with people wanting to go both up and down. Not just that the refurbished Shepherds Bush tube has nice white tiles, but seems to have no increased access to cope with - duh - Monroe people. Not just because nothing has been done to make traffic move around Shepherds Bush green. Will any of the people who flocked there on Saturday to then be held in a queue outside the tube station closed for congestion in pouring rain - and who then could not get a bus either - ever bother to make it back?
Of course Saturday was exceptional. It was new. It was horrible weather. But there seems to be a complete mismatch between the assumptions on which Westfield was built -- vast numbers of people arriving from all over London - and the ability of the transport system to plan on anything like a comparable basis. But you wait 11 years for a mega-mall to be built (reassuring that these people are building the shopping mall for the Olympic village) and then you spend two hours in the rain trying to get away from it.
But that is not the only problem with the development... it is literally all shops and a few restaurants. No homes. No offices.
In short it is a monument to American suburban planning. Giant mall; inadequate public transport; single use. Disconnected from the local community. A potential blight on other local high streets. Jane Jacobs would be turning in her grave....
Tuesday 28 October 2008
Relative failure
It must be a sign of unsuccessful ageing that the airwaves seem to be dominated by friends. Just getting used to waking up to hear Evan Davis (ex-flatmate) interviewing Robert Peston (friend) about a rescue deal organised by Tom Scholar (ex-flatmate) with dire fiscal consequences predicted by Robert Chote (friend) with Michael Crick (friend) making political mayhem on Newsnight. They are all clearly having a great meltdown.
At least they are still on the top of their game. With the rise of David Cameron a few years ago, it became rather clear that my generation was going to miss out on political power (Damian, Theresa, Willetts all in the too old box - DG and DW don't make it into the pack for the Sky News Top trumps one of my team's husband brought back from the party conference and TM counts as a "veteran"). We seem to have gone to past it without ever being "it" at any point - I suppose there is still Alan Duncan...And my generation of Labour politicos seemed to go nowhere.... we know have a Cabinet of 60 year olds and 38 year olds with nothing in between. Whatever happened to Dave Brown? Gareth Daniel? The nearest we can offer is the official only clever person in the country -- simultaneously charged with sorting out climate change in the morning and systemic bank failure in the afternoon.... the eponymous Lord Turner...and he was at Cambridge.
But the two degrees of separation that is resonating most with those I know is that my cousin's son is a "celebrity" on Strictly Come Dancing (does that make him a second cousin? or something else?). And not just any celebrity, but one who seems to be quite a good dancer. Anyone who has seen me dance (or act) can testify to the power of genetics...
The only problem with basking in reflected fifteen minutes of fame is that I have never met him or my cousin...
At least they are still on the top of their game. With the rise of David Cameron a few years ago, it became rather clear that my generation was going to miss out on political power (Damian, Theresa, Willetts all in the too old box - DG and DW don't make it into the pack for the Sky News Top trumps one of my team's husband brought back from the party conference and TM counts as a "veteran"). We seem to have gone to past it without ever being "it" at any point - I suppose there is still Alan Duncan...And my generation of Labour politicos seemed to go nowhere.... we know have a Cabinet of 60 year olds and 38 year olds with nothing in between. Whatever happened to Dave Brown? Gareth Daniel? The nearest we can offer is the official only clever person in the country -- simultaneously charged with sorting out climate change in the morning and systemic bank failure in the afternoon.... the eponymous Lord Turner...and he was at Cambridge.
But the two degrees of separation that is resonating most with those I know is that my cousin's son is a "celebrity" on Strictly Come Dancing (does that make him a second cousin? or something else?). And not just any celebrity, but one who seems to be quite a good dancer. Anyone who has seen me dance (or act) can testify to the power of genetics...
The only problem with basking in reflected fifteen minutes of fame is that I have never met him or my cousin...
What a difference seven weeks make
Long time, no blog... seems hard to think that only seven weeks ago, PL (Pre-Lehman), we still wondered if recession might be avoided; I only had a couple of bank accounts and the government only owned a couple of banks; the Tories were leading the polls by miles, and Sarah Brown had yet to make a conference appearance; DECC sounded like a brand of 50s electronic goods or something John Prescott might do to a stroppy voter.
So all this has meant busy times...working out how to disentangle bits of climate change from what we do (and concluding that we need a better way of rearranging government to tackle cross-cutting problems, without having to occupy top departmental brains on merging IT systems, finding buildings and appointing even more HR directors). And meanwhile completely failing to book tickets to go over to the US to watch the coronation of King Obama which will make a lot of nine year olds very happy indeed and lose me $100 -- and that is now quite serious money in very feeble pounds.
Tempting to see everything as evidence of catalytic behaviour change towards more sustainable habits - and certainly an undercurrent in some of the press that there are silver linings in recessions- people will be nicer, have more time for each other - perhaps too much as they need not be troubled with the boring inconvenience of work, be weaned off debt-driven competitive consumption and rediscover quilting bees (not sure we ever had those in the UK) as sewing machine sales soar, people discover shoes can be mended and that they do not need a new plasma screen every week. There seem to be huge number fo cyclists in the morning at Hyde Park corner - but that may just be that - until tonight - the weather in October has made up in part for the sheer awfulness of the summer.
But perhaps, the responsible thing now - for people with semi-secure jobs and pensions - is to spend rather than wait for forecast deflation next year. So rather than save - and worry about where to put the cash, the time may have come for an out and out countercyclical consumption binge. But deep thrift is a hard habit to break - and not sure yet that I have yet been catalysed into action.
So all this has meant busy times...working out how to disentangle bits of climate change from what we do (and concluding that we need a better way of rearranging government to tackle cross-cutting problems, without having to occupy top departmental brains on merging IT systems, finding buildings and appointing even more HR directors). And meanwhile completely failing to book tickets to go over to the US to watch the coronation of King Obama which will make a lot of nine year olds very happy indeed and lose me $100 -- and that is now quite serious money in very feeble pounds.
Tempting to see everything as evidence of catalytic behaviour change towards more sustainable habits - and certainly an undercurrent in some of the press that there are silver linings in recessions- people will be nicer, have more time for each other - perhaps too much as they need not be troubled with the boring inconvenience of work, be weaned off debt-driven competitive consumption and rediscover quilting bees (not sure we ever had those in the UK) as sewing machine sales soar, people discover shoes can be mended and that they do not need a new plasma screen every week. There seem to be huge number fo cyclists in the morning at Hyde Park corner - but that may just be that - until tonight - the weather in October has made up in part for the sheer awfulness of the summer.
But perhaps, the responsible thing now - for people with semi-secure jobs and pensions - is to spend rather than wait for forecast deflation next year. So rather than save - and worry about where to put the cash, the time may have come for an out and out countercyclical consumption binge. But deep thrift is a hard habit to break - and not sure yet that I have yet been catalysed into action.
Wednesday 10 September 2008
Nightmare on McKinsey street
Just returned from an excellent long weekend at a sixtieth birthday party in France (or was that fortieth?). Cracking event in the Ducal Palace at Uzes - putting non-bopping thirtysomethings to shame. Thank you Robin and Madeleine. Must post on the Full of Life website...
But also a very convenient opportunity to take stock of the state of the differences between the UK and the French economy.First experiences great - speeding through the French countryside on the TGV. great infrastructure. But shame about the customer service. The fondly imagined elegant dining car with haute cuisine served as we headed South at 200+km an hour turned into a Gallic shrug and a piece of Dundee cake and a toblerone.. il n'y avait rien a manger dans le train. And the lack of catering didn't even merit an announcement. C'est toujours come ca? You do better than that with the Southern train trolley to Bognor.
And so to Uzes. Gorgeous place. Beautiful soft glowing yellow stone; great squares; alleyways - and not a brand name or chain in sight. Ou etait le starbucks d'antan? le Pizza Express ou le Zizzi? Since there is hardly a Town in the UK that has escaped the onward march of the chains, it was very strange to discover that France really still is a nation of epiciers and boulangers - where everything still closes for lunch. Recommended places to stay were all quaint little hotels in the city centre full of character and charm - ni un Marriott ni un Premier Inn a voir.
I am sure that M Sarkozy has commissioned his own version of the notorious 1998 McKinsey report on the UK economy which will tell him that all this quaintness and inefficiency is costing the French economy. After all, that report said we needed to replicate the scale of Walmarts. realise the economies of scale on distribution of a chain economy and put an end to non-standardised country house hotels to achieve the same productive use of space as Travelodges if we were to close the productivity gap with the US.
The only problem with that analysis was that France also had higher productivity than the UK - without going the US route (of course, they could have even higher productivity....)But at what price? Would the Brits still be flocking to Uzes if it tuned into yet another mall? would the guests at the party have been so charmed with the choice between two identikit hotels? Perhaps, because the weather would still be great - and until all planning laws were relaxed (McKinsey did after all lead to the Barker review of planning), the views would still be stunning wandering between the newly industrialised vineyards. Not worth it - even if you could get a decent meal on the newly privatised TGV going down there
But I hope not. Any marginal increment in GDP would be at a very high price in terms of qualite de vie. So let us hope that there is no gallic McKinsey and Uzes remains its charming self. And we can let M Sarkozy proceed with his unusual ambition of turning the Paris banlieue into Croydon to draw people out of the centre of the town!
But also a very convenient opportunity to take stock of the state of the differences between the UK and the French economy.First experiences great - speeding through the French countryside on the TGV. great infrastructure. But shame about the customer service. The fondly imagined elegant dining car with haute cuisine served as we headed South at 200+km an hour turned into a Gallic shrug and a piece of Dundee cake and a toblerone.. il n'y avait rien a manger dans le train. And the lack of catering didn't even merit an announcement. C'est toujours come ca? You do better than that with the Southern train trolley to Bognor.
And so to Uzes. Gorgeous place. Beautiful soft glowing yellow stone; great squares; alleyways - and not a brand name or chain in sight. Ou etait le starbucks d'antan? le Pizza Express ou le Zizzi? Since there is hardly a Town in the UK that has escaped the onward march of the chains, it was very strange to discover that France really still is a nation of epiciers and boulangers - where everything still closes for lunch. Recommended places to stay were all quaint little hotels in the city centre full of character and charm - ni un Marriott ni un Premier Inn a voir.
I am sure that M Sarkozy has commissioned his own version of the notorious 1998 McKinsey report on the UK economy which will tell him that all this quaintness and inefficiency is costing the French economy. After all, that report said we needed to replicate the scale of Walmarts. realise the economies of scale on distribution of a chain economy and put an end to non-standardised country house hotels to achieve the same productive use of space as Travelodges if we were to close the productivity gap with the US.
The only problem with that analysis was that France also had higher productivity than the UK - without going the US route (of course, they could have even higher productivity....)But at what price? Would the Brits still be flocking to Uzes if it tuned into yet another mall? would the guests at the party have been so charmed with the choice between two identikit hotels? Perhaps, because the weather would still be great - and until all planning laws were relaxed (McKinsey did after all lead to the Barker review of planning), the views would still be stunning wandering between the newly industrialised vineyards. Not worth it - even if you could get a decent meal on the newly privatised TGV going down there
But I hope not. Any marginal increment in GDP would be at a very high price in terms of qualite de vie. So let us hope that there is no gallic McKinsey and Uzes remains its charming self. And we can let M Sarkozy proceed with his unusual ambition of turning the Paris banlieue into Croydon to draw people out of the centre of the town!
Tuesday 2 September 2008
Mind the Gap
its now 20 years since I went to America on my Harkness fellowship. Before we were allowed off to try our luck on our own, we had a three day induction session in New York - the general message of which was - you might think these people speak the same language as us - but they are really different.
I didn't really believe it at the time. And I found the Americans I met nice, bright easy to get on with and liked them a lot. So I thought this bit about culture shock was somewhat overdone. The biggest gaps I encountered were over spelling with "s"s instead of "z"s and the fact that to table something in Congress means to take it off the agenda rather than to put it on...
But the fact that Sarah Palin is even considered a candidate for elected office outside Wasalia (or Hartlepool) seems to be to be evidence that the culture gap is alive and well. I woke up this morning (4/9) to her convention speech playing on the World Service. Every word, every sentiment grated. On every issue she seems to represent all that is most alien about the ueberchristiansed obsessive American right -- and those of us who thought that Obama vs McCain mattered less than the fact that 2009 that there would be a new person - and some new thinking - in the White House have just been proved very wrong. McCain is now looking like a desperate old man - willing to sacrifice anything for his four years of fame - a prisoner of his party who will do anything to be a one term president - including leaving a legacy of a creationist global warming denier as President.
And what makes it even worse is I have a bet with an Obama fan that McC will win. Never will I be more relieved to write a cheque for $ 100.
But another thought.... how does Canada manage to be surrounded by bible belts to the north and south and stay so (relatively) sane? Is this the legacy of a longer heritage of empire and the Anglican church dulling all interest in religion?
I didn't really believe it at the time. And I found the Americans I met nice, bright easy to get on with and liked them a lot. So I thought this bit about culture shock was somewhat overdone. The biggest gaps I encountered were over spelling with "s"s instead of "z"s and the fact that to table something in Congress means to take it off the agenda rather than to put it on...
But the fact that Sarah Palin is even considered a candidate for elected office outside Wasalia (or Hartlepool) seems to be to be evidence that the culture gap is alive and well. I woke up this morning (4/9) to her convention speech playing on the World Service. Every word, every sentiment grated. On every issue she seems to represent all that is most alien about the ueberchristiansed obsessive American right -- and those of us who thought that Obama vs McCain mattered less than the fact that 2009 that there would be a new person - and some new thinking - in the White House have just been proved very wrong. McCain is now looking like a desperate old man - willing to sacrifice anything for his four years of fame - a prisoner of his party who will do anything to be a one term president - including leaving a legacy of a creationist global warming denier as President.
And what makes it even worse is I have a bet with an Obama fan that McC will win. Never will I be more relieved to write a cheque for $ 100.
But another thought.... how does Canada manage to be surrounded by bible belts to the north and south and stay so (relatively) sane? Is this the legacy of a longer heritage of empire and the Anglican church dulling all interest in religion?
Monday 1 September 2008
As old as you feel
In a year when I have seen hardly any films, it might seem odd that the second (or is it third) movie I saw this year was Mamma Mia. Not exactly adding to my cultural arthouse credentials. Only saw it after spending most of the evening cycling around West London trying to find a non-sing-a-long version - only to conclude at the end that it was such fun that we should have had a go at belting out SOS -- after all, could hardly be worse than Pierce Brosnan (OK I could be - but I am not co-starring in a musical -- know your limitations).
But why is Mamma Mia raking it in at the Box Office? The Abba songs? - but Abba Gold is on sale for less than the price of a ticket at the Coronet, let alone the overpriced Odeon High Street Kensington. The shots of Greek islands? - but you can get that watching A Place in the Sun or the travel channel.
I think the secret of Mamma Mia's success is first that the cast look, literally as though they are "having the time of their life" (that's a quote from Dancing Queen if you didn't spot it). But it is also almost unique in recent movie history - or maybe in all movie history - in showing a bunch of fifty to sixty year olds having a great time, pairing up and dominating a movie as the LOVE INTEREST? When did that last happen? and when did you last see a 50+ man ending up with a late fiftiesh woman - as opposed to be someone young enough to be his granddaughter.
So that is quite good for the thesis that fifty is the new thirty. Added to that the triumph of some older biddies in the Olympics - the forty-one year old swimmer (swimmers seem to be getting older by the year - a decade or so ago they were all under 22 -- now they seem to go on for ever). Gymnasts in their late 30s (and looking older). Cyclists coming back for more and more. I will start training for London 2012 now.
But then this upbeat thinking about age and lack of impact is completely shattered by an item on the Defra website trailing a new government website aimed at the over-50s, entitled "Full of Life" - check it out at http://campaigns.direct.gov.uk/fulloflife/. Aimed at older people (sic) it tells them handy stuff about how to use the internet (maybe it does tell you how to put hyperlinks into blogs); is full of inspiring stories about how wise they are... and shouldn't be written off yet. Did the people inventing this stuff try it on their Permanent Secretary first who might enjoy the handy hints on not being a totally useless member of the community at age 50+? And will we all get the day off on Oct 1st - now officially Older Person's Day. Party time on zimmerframes.
So I am now officially annoyed. The Mamma Mia effect has worn off and I'll stop thinking that some day my pierce will come. No option but to give up my Olympic ambitions and return to being Victor Meldrew and book that Saga cruise.
But why is Mamma Mia raking it in at the Box Office? The Abba songs? - but Abba Gold is on sale for less than the price of a ticket at the Coronet, let alone the overpriced Odeon High Street Kensington. The shots of Greek islands? - but you can get that watching A Place in the Sun or the travel channel.
I think the secret of Mamma Mia's success is first that the cast look, literally as though they are "having the time of their life" (that's a quote from Dancing Queen if you didn't spot it). But it is also almost unique in recent movie history - or maybe in all movie history - in showing a bunch of fifty to sixty year olds having a great time, pairing up and dominating a movie as the LOVE INTEREST? When did that last happen? and when did you last see a 50+ man ending up with a late fiftiesh woman - as opposed to be someone young enough to be his granddaughter.
So that is quite good for the thesis that fifty is the new thirty. Added to that the triumph of some older biddies in the Olympics - the forty-one year old swimmer (swimmers seem to be getting older by the year - a decade or so ago they were all under 22 -- now they seem to go on for ever). Gymnasts in their late 30s (and looking older). Cyclists coming back for more and more. I will start training for London 2012 now.
But then this upbeat thinking about age and lack of impact is completely shattered by an item on the Defra website trailing a new government website aimed at the over-50s, entitled "Full of Life" - check it out at http://campaigns.direct.gov.uk/fulloflife/. Aimed at older people (sic) it tells them handy stuff about how to use the internet (maybe it does tell you how to put hyperlinks into blogs); is full of inspiring stories about how wise they are... and shouldn't be written off yet. Did the people inventing this stuff try it on their Permanent Secretary first who might enjoy the handy hints on not being a totally useless member of the community at age 50+? And will we all get the day off on Oct 1st - now officially Older Person's Day. Party time on zimmerframes.
So I am now officially annoyed. The Mamma Mia effect has worn off and I'll stop thinking that some day my pierce will come. No option but to give up my Olympic ambitions and return to being Victor Meldrew and book that Saga cruise.
Sunday 31 August 2008
Essay crisis
Its the last chance to add to the August blog list -- and I need to get something down urgently or will have only one thing down for the month. But so much to do these days with the gym and the tennis court, the Olympics with success of the oddly named Team GB- did they always call it that or is it some subliminal thing? , the resurgent KP England (good thing I didn't immortalise my great "terrible decision" prediction there for all to read) and now the US tennis to watch (though Murray gets no less annoying). Brief stumble in Nadal worship caused by his very un-Federer like decision to appear on the front of the New Yorker with his shirt off - but am sure it was all in a good cause. On medical front have new physio and new exercises which require me to make my buttocks ache - her words not mine... so my current aim is to be a pain in the backside - or at least to have one.
So that is a whole bunch of excuses - and why the dullest August on record - its official - has actually been quite fun - helped by spending it in Greece and Spain. But the new month;s resolution is to get back to blogging - as the political season gets back from the beach, we limber up for Matt Santos vs whoever Geena Davis played in that Commander-in-Chief thing which seems to have dictated McC's VEEP pick (time for the Hillaristas - I missed where PUMAs came from - to realise views trump gender), the words Alistair Darling and gaffe appear together in a headline for the first ever time.
So I have read a lot; got a bit browner and fitter; made my buttocks ache - but not enough - and am generally feeling like getting back to serious work - until my next holiday on Friday. I will have only worked one Friday since July -- and that feels pretty good. And I have finally cracked using my nice little Defra laptop from home. And this is a portable computer that even I am prepared to lug around - so more "working from home" may be in order.
So new month's resolution - back to serious blogging. The holiday is over.
So that is a whole bunch of excuses - and why the dullest August on record - its official - has actually been quite fun - helped by spending it in Greece and Spain. But the new month;s resolution is to get back to blogging - as the political season gets back from the beach, we limber up for Matt Santos vs whoever Geena Davis played in that Commander-in-Chief thing which seems to have dictated McC's VEEP pick (time for the Hillaristas - I missed where PUMAs came from - to realise views trump gender), the words Alistair Darling and gaffe appear together in a headline for the first ever time.
So I have read a lot; got a bit browner and fitter; made my buttocks ache - but not enough - and am generally feeling like getting back to serious work - until my next holiday on Friday. I will have only worked one Friday since July -- and that feels pretty good. And I have finally cracked using my nice little Defra laptop from home. And this is a portable computer that even I am prepared to lug around - so more "working from home" may be in order.
So new month's resolution - back to serious blogging. The holiday is over.
Saturday 9 August 2008
Breaking the drought
too much going on all summer to do much blogging.... loads of people passing through - visitors from Virginia, Sudan and Kosovo (why do my friends all end up in weird places); gyms to be gone to; starting playing tennis again - ball toss gone awry and still very immobile; cricket to watch - day three of a cracking test at the Oval - though forecast dire from lunchtime. And in between even some work to do as we ready ourselves for autumn relaunches.
Interesting holiday in Corfu - lovely villa - a real Place in the Sun special. You would definitely buy it - especially if you didn't know about the wasps when investing; for the pool but also for the views across the picturesque harbour of Kassiopi over to the barren hills of Albania. But what you didn't see from the villa was that the influence of Brits has turned the undoubtedly charming fishing village Kassiopi was twenty years ago into a Laganas lite. Having avoided the costas in Spain it has been a long time since I have been exposed to the reality of Brits at play. No need or attempt to speak a word of Greek. Sky sports, karaoke and pop quizzes in every bar. A lot of pink and blue flesh on display. And - I am told by our teenage companions - very good nightlife - consisting for them of Sloanes on something called WKD - not to be confused with WD40. Biggest crisis was when the teens got carded at 4.00 a.m. in the morning and got chucked out for only being 17.... and discovered their fake ID was lurking at home unpacked. Biggest complaint was that this was unfair as the average age of the drinkers in the bar was 14. Still, one red card seemed not to count for the rest of the holiday as the same bar happily had them back (suddenly aged???) night after night; daybreak after daybreak.
Interesting that if these children were not being sent to expensive schools by their parents, and lived in SE3 rather than SW3, their behaviour would probably make them near ASBO candidates - though their gangs carry fake Gucci handbags and credit cards rather than knives. Instead most of them will be at Oxford in a couple of years time, and the Etonians will probably be leading the Tories in another fifteen to twenty (scary visions of watching them around the pool that I was on holiday with Cameron and Osborne's younger brothers). But despite the success of Dave and Boris they will need to work on the Wooster accents their schools seem determined to handicap them with - and which will certainly rule out a job in the BBC.
But biggest surprise.... except for the morning I got woken up when they were coming back from the bar just as I was battling an annoying mosquito and debating whether to get up to do a Sun Salutation (from my fifteen minute yoga book) at dawn, they were good holiday companions... as long as there was enough ketchup around to go with every meal. Maybe McDonalds has an even greater impact on lifetime habits than
Eton.
Interesting holiday in Corfu - lovely villa - a real Place in the Sun special. You would definitely buy it - especially if you didn't know about the wasps when investing; for the pool but also for the views across the picturesque harbour of Kassiopi over to the barren hills of Albania. But what you didn't see from the villa was that the influence of Brits has turned the undoubtedly charming fishing village Kassiopi was twenty years ago into a Laganas lite. Having avoided the costas in Spain it has been a long time since I have been exposed to the reality of Brits at play. No need or attempt to speak a word of Greek. Sky sports, karaoke and pop quizzes in every bar. A lot of pink and blue flesh on display. And - I am told by our teenage companions - very good nightlife - consisting for them of Sloanes on something called WKD - not to be confused with WD40. Biggest crisis was when the teens got carded at 4.00 a.m. in the morning and got chucked out for only being 17.... and discovered their fake ID was lurking at home unpacked. Biggest complaint was that this was unfair as the average age of the drinkers in the bar was 14. Still, one red card seemed not to count for the rest of the holiday as the same bar happily had them back (suddenly aged???) night after night; daybreak after daybreak.
Interesting that if these children were not being sent to expensive schools by their parents, and lived in SE3 rather than SW3, their behaviour would probably make them near ASBO candidates - though their gangs carry fake Gucci handbags and credit cards rather than knives. Instead most of them will be at Oxford in a couple of years time, and the Etonians will probably be leading the Tories in another fifteen to twenty (scary visions of watching them around the pool that I was on holiday with Cameron and Osborne's younger brothers). But despite the success of Dave and Boris they will need to work on the Wooster accents their schools seem determined to handicap them with - and which will certainly rule out a job in the BBC.
But biggest surprise.... except for the morning I got woken up when they were coming back from the bar just as I was battling an annoying mosquito and debating whether to get up to do a Sun Salutation (from my fifteen minute yoga book) at dawn, they were good holiday companions... as long as there was enough ketchup around to go with every meal. Maybe McDonalds has an even greater impact on lifetime habits than
Eton.
Tuesday 15 July 2008
Sign of the times 4
It may just be a small sample, but in the bike shop yesterday the bikes seemed to be flying off the shelf. I have no idea how many they sell in a week - but at 6.30 on a Monday there were two bike sales being completed. And at the Hyde Park corner crossing this evening there seemed to be a lot of gleaming Ridgebacks and Giants on show.
I tried to check up on what was happening on the ONS website. But looking at road transport just gave me a lot of car data - ONS don't seem to use anything else -- and the latest cycle data I could find finished in 2001.
Stories from the US of soaring bike sales as SUVs become a thing of the past. I wonder what the hard data is here.
I tried to check up on what was happening on the ONS website. But looking at road transport just gave me a lot of car data - ONS don't seem to use anything else -- and the latest cycle data I could find finished in 2001.
Stories from the US of soaring bike sales as SUVs become a thing of the past. I wonder what the hard data is here.
Tuesday 8 July 2008
Lessons in leadership
where did John Browne go wrong at BP? that - rather surprisingly - was the question that came up at a two day festival of leadership at Michael Portillo's alma mater of Peterhouse Cambridge (nice orchard) last week.... All CH rules so can't go into too many details -- but I joined a group on whether leaders needed crises in order to lead. And the proposition was that it was opposition within BP to the JB rebrand to Beyond Petroleum and the replacement of the shield by the helios that lead inexorably to his downfall. Not surprisingly, that thesis was advanced by someone who had worked on the rebranding....
Nice to put yourself at the centre of the story - but the link between people who did not like Beyond Petroleum and the people failing to invest in safety in Texas City is pretty tendentious. So I put forward my alternative critique of what went wrong at BP under John Browne (notwithstanding that an awful lot went right as well).
The first - and biggest - BP mistake was the performance culture. There is nothing wrong with a performance culture - indeed I have never felt under so much performance pressure as I did at BP. But the BP performance culture became a macho obsession -- every quarter better; no admission of failure; no recognition of reality. The result was that any manipulable number was manipulated -- to make it -look good. No surprise that when sarbanes-oxley hit, an awful lot of underprovision - of environmental clean-up; pension provision was discovered. And that is the same mentality that starts cutting back on routine maintenance.
The second problem was the interlocking incentives that became a high performance mirage conspiracy. If my bonus depends on your performance I don't have too much incentives to question the phoney numbers you are serving up. So what should be a way of giving the Board assurance on delivery becomes a virtual performance Ponzi scheme.
The third was a culture of sycophancy. Hardly anyone ever dared challenge John Browne. he knew more about your business than you did. He was always right (and his one error - on Sidanco in Russia would be forgotten by the triumph of the TNK JV - well that was the theory). Everyone was jostling for the succession -- and knew that they were all part of a prolonged beauty contest with only one judge. Not an environment conducive to serious internal challenge - more like the court of Henry VIII.
But what about the non-executives ask the corporate governance groupies? But that exposes the weakness of the non-executives. It is simply unrealistic to expect non-execs to be able to see off an apparently all-conquering executive team. And if the right numbers and messages aren't coming up to the top of the executive tree, hard to see how the part-timers even more distanced from the business are going to be able to do it.
So what are the lessons? John Browne was the most impressive leader I have come across. But he would have been even better if he had encourage a culture of internal challenge and honesty and not ruled by terror. And then someone might have dared admit that there was a big safety issue in the US refineries. Or that things were going wrong in the Alaska pipelines. And his reputation - deservedly high for transforming BP from second division to top player - would not have suffered a torrid final year.
Nice to put yourself at the centre of the story - but the link between people who did not like Beyond Petroleum and the people failing to invest in safety in Texas City is pretty tendentious. So I put forward my alternative critique of what went wrong at BP under John Browne (notwithstanding that an awful lot went right as well).
The first - and biggest - BP mistake was the performance culture. There is nothing wrong with a performance culture - indeed I have never felt under so much performance pressure as I did at BP. But the BP performance culture became a macho obsession -- every quarter better; no admission of failure; no recognition of reality. The result was that any manipulable number was manipulated -- to make it -look good. No surprise that when sarbanes-oxley hit, an awful lot of underprovision - of environmental clean-up; pension provision was discovered. And that is the same mentality that starts cutting back on routine maintenance.
The second problem was the interlocking incentives that became a high performance mirage conspiracy. If my bonus depends on your performance I don't have too much incentives to question the phoney numbers you are serving up. So what should be a way of giving the Board assurance on delivery becomes a virtual performance Ponzi scheme.
The third was a culture of sycophancy. Hardly anyone ever dared challenge John Browne. he knew more about your business than you did. He was always right (and his one error - on Sidanco in Russia would be forgotten by the triumph of the TNK JV - well that was the theory). Everyone was jostling for the succession -- and knew that they were all part of a prolonged beauty contest with only one judge. Not an environment conducive to serious internal challenge - more like the court of Henry VIII.
But what about the non-executives ask the corporate governance groupies? But that exposes the weakness of the non-executives. It is simply unrealistic to expect non-execs to be able to see off an apparently all-conquering executive team. And if the right numbers and messages aren't coming up to the top of the executive tree, hard to see how the part-timers even more distanced from the business are going to be able to do it.
So what are the lessons? John Browne was the most impressive leader I have come across. But he would have been even better if he had encourage a culture of internal challenge and honesty and not ruled by terror. And then someone might have dared admit that there was a big safety issue in the US refineries. Or that things were going wrong in the Alaska pipelines. And his reputation - deservedly high for transforming BP from second division to top player - would not have suffered a torrid final year.
Monday 7 July 2008
Strategic error
Not a recantation of the Defra strategy refresh - but a lament for a key failure of decision-making under uncertainty.... whatever possessed me to be the only person on the planet who failed to see the last set of the Rafa v Roger epic last night. Am trying to analyse how I go this so wrong... So let us analyse the factors.
First, timing. The rain break at 7.50 meant that I could just catch the last direct train. Five minutes later I would have not been able to get it...
Second, meanness. Staying in Chichester imposed a cost - the extra £ 26 of buying a peak fare to London instead of a saver. £ 26 seemed a high price to pay for the option of a last set - when it looked improbable (notwithstanding Alex the Wimbledon weather man claiming play could restart within 25 minutes) that play would restart and finish that night.
Third, a feeling that Federer would win in the end ... after Rafa failed to take the three key break points for 5-3 in the third set; failed to impose himself at 5-2 in the tie-break; take the two match points he did create in the fourth; a feeling that in the same way as England crumbled in Adelaide, he just didn't quite believe that he could win.
And fourth, so I valued avoiding an evening in Chichester watching it rain at Wimbledon and Sue Barker get ever more despairing, a slightly early start the next morning at more than having the option on watching the final set of the greatest tennis match ever. On a par with my friend Jayne's decision not to pay £ 10 for the option to watch England win the Ashes at the Oval in September 2005 (but that had a much lower probability in March that year - so a less loony decision - but being there is a more intense delight than simply being one of the 13.1 million watching here on TV - so a higher cost for getting it wrong).
But I got it wrong. I now realise that I would have paid a really quite high price to have seen that last set of nerve-shredding tennis in the gloom of Wimbledon. So after missing the last set last year, I vowed never to miss a Nadal-Federer final - only to repeat again. Next year I will not budge - but next year the roof will reduce the uncertainty so maybe this is a dilemma that I will never face again.
Still, Rafa still won - so a great week for Spanish sport - but I can't believe I saw the football... and missed the drama of the tennis.
First, timing. The rain break at 7.50 meant that I could just catch the last direct train. Five minutes later I would have not been able to get it...
Second, meanness. Staying in Chichester imposed a cost - the extra £ 26 of buying a peak fare to London instead of a saver. £ 26 seemed a high price to pay for the option of a last set - when it looked improbable (notwithstanding Alex the Wimbledon weather man claiming play could restart within 25 minutes) that play would restart and finish that night.
Third, a feeling that Federer would win in the end ... after Rafa failed to take the three key break points for 5-3 in the third set; failed to impose himself at 5-2 in the tie-break; take the two match points he did create in the fourth; a feeling that in the same way as England crumbled in Adelaide, he just didn't quite believe that he could win.
And fourth, so I valued avoiding an evening in Chichester watching it rain at Wimbledon and Sue Barker get ever more despairing, a slightly early start the next morning at more than having the option on watching the final set of the greatest tennis match ever. On a par with my friend Jayne's decision not to pay £ 10 for the option to watch England win the Ashes at the Oval in September 2005 (but that had a much lower probability in March that year - so a less loony decision - but being there is a more intense delight than simply being one of the 13.1 million watching here on TV - so a higher cost for getting it wrong).
But I got it wrong. I now realise that I would have paid a really quite high price to have seen that last set of nerve-shredding tennis in the gloom of Wimbledon. So after missing the last set last year, I vowed never to miss a Nadal-Federer final - only to repeat again. Next year I will not budge - but next year the roof will reduce the uncertainty so maybe this is a dilemma that I will never face again.
Still, Rafa still won - so a great week for Spanish sport - but I can't believe I saw the football... and missed the drama of the tennis.
Thursday 3 July 2008
Signs of the times 3
Fascinating stuff from Stuart Rose yesterday on the Marks slump.... people changing the way they shop. Fewer journeys to stores. More visits to local stores. Rejecting out of town shopping. And overpriced and overprepared M and S food. And there seems to be much less traffic on London streets -- I have managed to ride to work and not have to stop at Great George Street which normally only happens in the school holidays.
And on the TV they are just saying that Starbucks is cutting 12000 jobs in the US and cutting 600 outlets. Need to start monitoring that too.
Having to chop your own vegetables.. and make do with a bit less caffeine (not sure how much there is in a Starbucks coffee anyway) hardly seems the equivalent of the Irish potato famine. Which points to the need to make sure that wallowing in our own recession gloom does not make us forget where the real impacts of the food/ oil price hikes are being felt.
And on the TV they are just saying that Starbucks is cutting 12000 jobs in the US and cutting 600 outlets. Need to start monitoring that too.
Having to chop your own vegetables.. and make do with a bit less caffeine (not sure how much there is in a Starbucks coffee anyway) hardly seems the equivalent of the Irish potato famine. Which points to the need to make sure that wallowing in our own recession gloom does not make us forget where the real impacts of the food/ oil price hikes are being felt.
Saturday 28 June 2008
Signs of the times 2
intriguing story in today's Guardian about how transport organisations are ordering their drivers to drive more slowly (= sensibly, economically) to conserve fuel and thus save money in response to the high price of oil. London buses are also carrying Mayoral ads telling drivers to change gears at lower revs to save fuel and money. The most interesting statement though was from the airlines who said that notwithstanding the slower flying (2% slower on Easyjet), there would be no discernible difference for passengers.
It will be fascinating to see if this finally causes a reverse in the upward march of transport emissions -- particularly if cuts are significant -- to show what can be done without biofuels and attendant environmental and food price consequences; without taking the politically risky route of appearing to be anti-driver and anti-flyer; without challenging the overmighty car industry to raise its standards and without any major investment in new technology or infrastructure. It just requires people not to check out their brain when they get behind the wheel and to think about what they are doing - which seems harder than it looks. Last time I drove any distance (OK ten miles) my sedate 55 consigned me to very slow as people put their foot on the accelerator and burned down the A 27. Mind you that was five weeks ago so all could have changed now as people and companies realise that rising prices do not need to translate into the same rise in bills.
So have we finally reached a transport catalyst?
For some maybe - but not for everyone. Interestingly two airlines were reported as rejecting these moves and said instead that they would simply be opting to charge their passengers more as they continue to pump out the carbon. Well done BA and Ryanair.
It will be fascinating to see if this finally causes a reverse in the upward march of transport emissions -- particularly if cuts are significant -- to show what can be done without biofuels and attendant environmental and food price consequences; without taking the politically risky route of appearing to be anti-driver and anti-flyer; without challenging the overmighty car industry to raise its standards and without any major investment in new technology or infrastructure. It just requires people not to check out their brain when they get behind the wheel and to think about what they are doing - which seems harder than it looks. Last time I drove any distance (OK ten miles) my sedate 55 consigned me to very slow as people put their foot on the accelerator and burned down the A 27. Mind you that was five weeks ago so all could have changed now as people and companies realise that rising prices do not need to translate into the same rise in bills.
So have we finally reached a transport catalyst?
For some maybe - but not for everyone. Interestingly two airlines were reported as rejecting these moves and said instead that they would simply be opting to charge their passengers more as they continue to pump out the carbon. Well done BA and Ryanair.
Thursday 26 June 2008
HD or not HD?
My TV suddenly decided to restore colour to celebrate the second Spanish goal (tips seem to be doing quite well!). But I still need to order a new Sky Box. And today a new and very 21st century dilemma presented itself.
One of my team was extolling the virtues of HD if you want to watch sport on television. So should I make the leap? Isn't it an unnecessary carbon indulgence? Is it the sort of thing I could do and stay in the "positive green" behaviour segment? Or would I be relegated a few segments? Is it the sort of thing I could do and still champion sustainable development. And wouldn't it mean consigning my - still functioning - TV to the WEE dump five years before it's due?
What scope for offsetting? Solar thermal? Probably not worthwhile given how long my energy consumption is already? Fly less -- hard to do less than this year so far (zero) but should i abandon a theoretical flight later this year? Would an HD screen reduce social capital and be bad for my health and wellbeing -- more evenings in and fewer in the gym sneaking peaks at the TV - with colour - while on the treadmill?
Or would it be the right counter-cyclical measure -- after all there are all those Dixon employees whose jobs are at risk as the market for electrical appliances crashes? Is it my responsibility to keep the market in electrical appliances afloat and bolster retail confidence? Is that what lies behind the shopping surge in May?And the factory somewhere near Shenzhen which undoubtedly makes all HD screens? Do I have a duty to them?
Or is the worst thing to do to invest now in a new sky box -- and then change my mind in a year's time....and have a redundant box I should never have bought in the first place?
The colour has just disappeared again -- but the BBC are refusing to show the Nadal match and offering me a choice of Murray (yawn) or Keothevang ....
I think the answer is to dither and delay - what I always do when faced with any option of spending money and committing to a capital purchase... and to postpone all purchases.. and hope that today's renewable energy strategy means that by 2020 I can buy a gas guzzling TV screen with a clear conscience. In the meanwhile I can take comfort that at least in Wimbledon even Rafa has to play in white... and as long as the Spaniards win, does it really matter if my TV picture simply shows 11 Germans and a ball as the red-strip Spaniards merge into the green sward of Vienna.
One of my team was extolling the virtues of HD if you want to watch sport on television. So should I make the leap? Isn't it an unnecessary carbon indulgence? Is it the sort of thing I could do and stay in the "positive green" behaviour segment? Or would I be relegated a few segments? Is it the sort of thing I could do and still champion sustainable development. And wouldn't it mean consigning my - still functioning - TV to the WEE dump five years before it's due?
What scope for offsetting? Solar thermal? Probably not worthwhile given how long my energy consumption is already? Fly less -- hard to do less than this year so far (zero) but should i abandon a theoretical flight later this year? Would an HD screen reduce social capital and be bad for my health and wellbeing -- more evenings in and fewer in the gym sneaking peaks at the TV - with colour - while on the treadmill?
Or would it be the right counter-cyclical measure -- after all there are all those Dixon employees whose jobs are at risk as the market for electrical appliances crashes? Is it my responsibility to keep the market in electrical appliances afloat and bolster retail confidence? Is that what lies behind the shopping surge in May?And the factory somewhere near Shenzhen which undoubtedly makes all HD screens? Do I have a duty to them?
Or is the worst thing to do to invest now in a new sky box -- and then change my mind in a year's time....and have a redundant box I should never have bought in the first place?
The colour has just disappeared again -- but the BBC are refusing to show the Nadal match and offering me a choice of Murray (yawn) or Keothevang ....
I think the answer is to dither and delay - what I always do when faced with any option of spending money and committing to a capital purchase... and to postpone all purchases.. and hope that today's renewable energy strategy means that by 2020 I can buy a gas guzzling TV screen with a clear conscience. In the meanwhile I can take comfort that at least in Wimbledon even Rafa has to play in white... and as long as the Spaniards win, does it really matter if my TV picture simply shows 11 Germans and a ball as the red-strip Spaniards merge into the green sward of Vienna.
Sunday 22 June 2008
Double fault?
So who is to blame for the fact that hapless Brits will yet again have to watch from the sidelines as a Swiss or a Serb or a Spaniard lifts the Wimbledon trophy yet again.
According to the head of the Lawn Tennis Association it's me -- or at least people like me, who play what is derisively called "social tennis".
So in a country where obesity is a rising problem; where most adults - and especially most women - get far too little physical activity - why knock a game which people can enjoy playing until they are old (we have ninety years olds playing); which doesn't require you to find 21 other like-minded people for a quick game and which people can and do keep playing (anyone out there playing much netball these days? hockey after thirty? football without needing to spend hours in A and E?).
But social tennis is to blame for the fact that the LTA -- for all its millions from Wimbledon - fails to produce a home-grown champion.
I think they need to look elsewhere for the solutions -- from giving kids whose parents don't play a chance to learn the game - which hardly even happens in private schools these days; to more summer coaching; to more courts; to more indoor facilities. And to stop caring so much - am looking forward to a Federer/Djokovic v Nadal final without ludicrous swooning jingoism from the dreadful BBC commentary team. Tennis is an individual not a team game -- who cares where they come from.
And elite sport needs to recognise its place in the world. If its a choice between sport for the few or sport for the many - chose the many any time - and let's view social tennis as a very good thing - and concentrate on producing the social tennis players of the future. That might even throw up a few really good ones.
According to the head of the Lawn Tennis Association it's me -- or at least people like me, who play what is derisively called "social tennis".
So in a country where obesity is a rising problem; where most adults - and especially most women - get far too little physical activity - why knock a game which people can enjoy playing until they are old (we have ninety years olds playing); which doesn't require you to find 21 other like-minded people for a quick game and which people can and do keep playing (anyone out there playing much netball these days? hockey after thirty? football without needing to spend hours in A and E?).
But social tennis is to blame for the fact that the LTA -- for all its millions from Wimbledon - fails to produce a home-grown champion.
I think they need to look elsewhere for the solutions -- from giving kids whose parents don't play a chance to learn the game - which hardly even happens in private schools these days; to more summer coaching; to more courts; to more indoor facilities. And to stop caring so much - am looking forward to a Federer/Djokovic v Nadal final without ludicrous swooning jingoism from the dreadful BBC commentary team. Tennis is an individual not a team game -- who cares where they come from.
And elite sport needs to recognise its place in the world. If its a choice between sport for the few or sport for the many - chose the many any time - and let's view social tennis as a very good thing - and concentrate on producing the social tennis players of the future. That might even throw up a few really good ones.
Nature notes
contact with nature is supposed to be good for your wellbeing - and so am feeling in extremely mellow mood after some very high grade contacts.
First news to report is that the blackbirds nesting on the light outside my mother's utility room have successfully reared two offspring (to add to the one in the honeysuckle earlier in the year). Our main contribution was to avoid accidental incineration of the aforesaid nest by turning the light on. But who needs Springwatch when you can have a birds' eye view from the comfort of your own ironing board.
Second news is of my first almost downland stroll of the year.... up to the entrance of Kingley Vale nature reserve; wheat rippling in the wind; swallows diving around; a few poppies in the last remaining bit of set-aside land.
Third is that my salad is doing well on my roof terrace - and today my tomato plants planted last week have produced their first flowers. So the delights of home production and food inches is soon to be mine again.
So all very pleasing and good for my contentment levels. So a bit of a disappointment to read a long report for the Health England group that I am on which is supposed to be looking at health and wellbeing - and yet again for a body sponsored by department of health cannot look at any measures that might improve health and wellbeing that take place outside a doctor's surgery.
First news to report is that the blackbirds nesting on the light outside my mother's utility room have successfully reared two offspring (to add to the one in the honeysuckle earlier in the year). Our main contribution was to avoid accidental incineration of the aforesaid nest by turning the light on. But who needs Springwatch when you can have a birds' eye view from the comfort of your own ironing board.
Second news is of my first almost downland stroll of the year.... up to the entrance of Kingley Vale nature reserve; wheat rippling in the wind; swallows diving around; a few poppies in the last remaining bit of set-aside land.
Third is that my salad is doing well on my roof terrace - and today my tomato plants planted last week have produced their first flowers. So the delights of home production and food inches is soon to be mine again.
So all very pleasing and good for my contentment levels. So a bit of a disappointment to read a long report for the Health England group that I am on which is supposed to be looking at health and wellbeing - and yet again for a body sponsored by department of health cannot look at any measures that might improve health and wellbeing that take place outside a doctor's surgery.
Thursday 19 June 2008
Sex discrimination
No - not a rant on what message we should take from the failure of yet another aggressive but apparently competent woman in the Apprentice ... nor Hillary's failure to get the US nomination - but a question of why the public authorities are so obsessed with whether people are sleeping together.
The immediate cause of this reflection is a letter I am having to write to the New Zealand High Commission. NZ needs people - the big signs above passport control at immigration implore departing passengers to stay in the country ("no need to go...."); she has a job in a shortage profession; but she wants to take her partner and the NZ authorities need to know that they have been living together at the same address for the past year before they are prepared to let them come in as a de facto couple. If for some reason, they had been part of the Microtrend "Living apart together" (remember UK leadership on that one) - they would have had to live even further apart - one staying behind in the UK.
The second prompt is the first civil partnership in my team - taking place tomorrow. As the cake makers in LA are finding out, civil partnerships or gay marriages are a whole new source of parties and happiness. But the fact that friends sleep together (unless of course they are Anglican priests who can enjoy the fiscal privileges of civil partnership but should not of course do anything vaguely dodgy) also conveys a whole bunch of fiscal privileges denied to mere friends -- or as the battling sisters found out at the European court, to people who had lived together and looked after each other all their life.
Why does the act of sleeping with someone bring with it all these benefits courtesy of the taxpayer - while other arrangements are not so favoured? (the weirdest example of this was when I asked if I could bring an Australian friend was visiting to a party at No.10 to view Trooping the Colour from Downing Street - but wasn't allowed to because he was "just a friend" and thus failed the Principal Private Secretary's sleeping together test). This is of course because we start from the premise of favouring marriage; marriage is about sex ... and children... but then we end discrimination (rightly) against other forms of sex - but lose the rationale for the taxpayer subsidy and introduce new and even less justifiable borderlines.
So what to do? Accept variation. Convey benefits attached to the raising of children (which has some public good elements) - and then, for the rest, let every individual have the ability to convey some companionship rights on a named individual(some pension transfer; a bit of tax privilege if we want) or translate them into a cashable equivalent if they need to buy those benefits from the market, because they can't bribe anyone else to provide them for free. And stop being so fussed about what people do in the bedroom - after all, the evidence shows more and more married couples are opting for his and her sleeping arrangements... will they lose their pension rights?
The immediate cause of this reflection is a letter I am having to write to the New Zealand High Commission. NZ needs people - the big signs above passport control at immigration implore departing passengers to stay in the country ("no need to go...."); she has a job in a shortage profession; but she wants to take her partner and the NZ authorities need to know that they have been living together at the same address for the past year before they are prepared to let them come in as a de facto couple. If for some reason, they had been part of the Microtrend "Living apart together" (remember UK leadership on that one) - they would have had to live even further apart - one staying behind in the UK.
The second prompt is the first civil partnership in my team - taking place tomorrow. As the cake makers in LA are finding out, civil partnerships or gay marriages are a whole new source of parties and happiness. But the fact that friends sleep together (unless of course they are Anglican priests who can enjoy the fiscal privileges of civil partnership but should not of course do anything vaguely dodgy) also conveys a whole bunch of fiscal privileges denied to mere friends -- or as the battling sisters found out at the European court, to people who had lived together and looked after each other all their life.
Why does the act of sleeping with someone bring with it all these benefits courtesy of the taxpayer - while other arrangements are not so favoured? (the weirdest example of this was when I asked if I could bring an Australian friend was visiting to a party at No.10 to view Trooping the Colour from Downing Street - but wasn't allowed to because he was "just a friend" and thus failed the Principal Private Secretary's sleeping together test). This is of course because we start from the premise of favouring marriage; marriage is about sex ... and children... but then we end discrimination (rightly) against other forms of sex - but lose the rationale for the taxpayer subsidy and introduce new and even less justifiable borderlines.
So what to do? Accept variation. Convey benefits attached to the raising of children (which has some public good elements) - and then, for the rest, let every individual have the ability to convey some companionship rights on a named individual(some pension transfer; a bit of tax privilege if we want) or translate them into a cashable equivalent if they need to buy those benefits from the market, because they can't bribe anyone else to provide them for free. And stop being so fussed about what people do in the bedroom - after all, the evidence shows more and more married couples are opting for his and her sleeping arrangements... will they lose their pension rights?
Monday 16 June 2008
Feeling inadequate
So Tiger Woods has just played 91 holes of golf to win the US Open with a knee just six weeks out of surgery - and I wimped out of defending my Defra mixed doubles title after four and a half months. And he had 13 other majors, whereas that was my first ever championship, so it can't have meant as much to him.....
But apart from that rehabilitation going very well. Now cycling to work when not disrupted by annoying US Presidents visiting. Going to the gym and walking on the treadmill using my nifty new shoe inserts (8mm on the left), as well as using a wide array of machines (and very satsifying to discover that in some cases I increase the weights when I take them over). And spent the weekend bouncing up and down the stairs as I entertained for the first time since I came back. Next challenge is throwing the rubbish out.
But apart from that rehabilitation going very well. Now cycling to work when not disrupted by annoying US Presidents visiting. Going to the gym and walking on the treadmill using my nifty new shoe inserts (8mm on the left), as well as using a wide array of machines (and very satsifying to discover that in some cases I increase the weights when I take them over). And spent the weekend bouncing up and down the stairs as I entertained for the first time since I came back. Next challenge is throwing the rubbish out.
Saturday 14 June 2008
Signs of the times
One of the things we talked about in Defra last week was the need to capture real time data on what was going on in the economy. So am going to use signs of the times to capture the data I notice -- on the grounds that I won't conceivably remember it to Monday.
We hear lots about the perilous state of the housing market at the moment - and it is clear that the housing as investment asset market is in a bad way. But the housing as consumption of housing services market seems still to be roaring away. At least that is my take-out from the fact that the two estate agents I passed on my way to the farmers market (buzzing - the people of W8 aren't going to Aldi - yet) are ONLY advertising rental properties -- not a single place for sale in their windows. But still worth advertising places to rent at £ 2500 per week!
The second thing on my walk was to see two shops boarded up and for rental - one a pricey sandwich/ juice bar and one a Threshers!
And the third was coming back and falling over my downstairs neigbour's weekend FT - front page headlines: parents are pawning Rolexes and Aston Martins to pay private school fees - which reflected a conversation over dinner last night on the plight of fired investment bankers and attracted varying degrees of sympathy for people who overleveraged themselves while benefiting from many of the actions which put the stability of the banking system at risk; housebuilders offering 10 year 25% interest free loans to first-time buyers to shift property.
Watch this space - and add your own.
We hear lots about the perilous state of the housing market at the moment - and it is clear that the housing as investment asset market is in a bad way. But the housing as consumption of housing services market seems still to be roaring away. At least that is my take-out from the fact that the two estate agents I passed on my way to the farmers market (buzzing - the people of W8 aren't going to Aldi - yet) are ONLY advertising rental properties -- not a single place for sale in their windows. But still worth advertising places to rent at £ 2500 per week!
The second thing on my walk was to see two shops boarded up and for rental - one a pricey sandwich/ juice bar and one a Threshers!
And the third was coming back and falling over my downstairs neigbour's weekend FT - front page headlines: parents are pawning Rolexes and Aston Martins to pay private school fees - which reflected a conversation over dinner last night on the plight of fired investment bankers and attracted varying degrees of sympathy for people who overleveraged themselves while benefiting from many of the actions which put the stability of the banking system at risk; housebuilders offering 10 year 25% interest free loans to first-time buyers to shift property.
Watch this space - and add your own.
Just deserts
One of the phenomena that those worried about social exclusion are often concerned about is "food deserts" - that poor people can't access nutritious good value food in their travel to shop area - more constrained for them than others by the fact they can't nip into the family size Volvo estate and do a mega-shop at the local (ie within 10 minutes drive) superstore.
It seems odd to add the residence of investment bankers, top lawyers and any number of expatriates to the list of underserved markets - but my experience of trying to but some decent food in Notting Hill Gate on Tuesday evening suggest it should be. The standard of supermarket provision went up here when first the Damien Hirst restaurant "Pharmacy" - where a naive foreign friend went to buy some ointment, suggesting it was a step ahead of its time became a Simply Food - which used to be nice quality, shame about the prices. And then the tired Europa become a new Tesco Metro. But my shopping trip in Tuesday suggested that standards are slipping. The staff in the M and S were cleaning the store around the customers - so fighting your way through only to discover that there was hardly anything on the shelves when you managed to navigate round the bucket to get to them. I walked out of Tescos after one look at the so-called fresh produce suggested that, where food was on offer, it might not be past its sell by date but it was certainly past its eat-by date.
So why is the offer so poor? Was this a one-off? A sign of cutting corners as cost pressures rise? Knowledge that there is not much real competition? A view that the rushed people of W11, having just had a miserable tube experience will be so quickly in and out they won't notice the prices (possibly right), nor the lack of anything much fresh to eat - and if they were fussed they would go to Whole Foods or the new Waitrose - which tells me its in Bayswater, but omitted to say where. Or just decide that its better to watch Gordon Ramsay while eating a takeaway.
The shock was greater because this was my first venture into a supermarket since my operation. I never used to go if I could help it. And shopping by remote control meant that I sent friends to shop -- and then blamed them for coming back with paltry offerings and didn't believe their claims there was nothing much to buy (its Tesco, how can there be no fresh fish/ no decent apples etc etc).
The poor food offer is part of a wider problem of the destruction of Notting Hill Gate which exemplifies clone town features - despite having a potentially tremendous footfall. Estate agents; mobile phone shops; banks galore; the odd surviving independent but unattractive convenience store - but not a baker; no delicatessen; no quality independent greengrocer; a fishmonger but no butcher - and for the rest charity shops - great for dumping junk but not great for buying anything. And chain restaurants.
So we need policies to reclaim the high street - and make it somewhere worth walking to rather than jumping into the car to avoid. For starters, how about a differential business rate - so chains pay more. And some local action like in San Francisco to support more independent stores. There should be a lot of space coming free as estate agents go bust over the next year - so no better time to transform the desert that is Notting Hill Gate?
And now I am off to see if my fond memories of the under threat farmers' market are justified or whether I am ripe for another disappointment.
10.30 a.m update: am now the joyful owner of piles of fresh asparagus; three bunches of carrots with tops on and have just come back from planting tomato plants and mint on my roof terrace -- I love the farmers' market. Now we just need to save it from becoming a Waitrose car park.
Next policy suggestion -- and one that the Competition Commission were not allowed to look at when they did their grocery study as public interest was deleted form their terms of reference in 2004 - make quality and character of high street; encouragement of independent business and diversity of offer part of planning requirements.
It seems odd to add the residence of investment bankers, top lawyers and any number of expatriates to the list of underserved markets - but my experience of trying to but some decent food in Notting Hill Gate on Tuesday evening suggest it should be. The standard of supermarket provision went up here when first the Damien Hirst restaurant "Pharmacy" - where a naive foreign friend went to buy some ointment, suggesting it was a step ahead of its time became a Simply Food - which used to be nice quality, shame about the prices. And then the tired Europa become a new Tesco Metro. But my shopping trip in Tuesday suggested that standards are slipping. The staff in the M and S were cleaning the store around the customers - so fighting your way through only to discover that there was hardly anything on the shelves when you managed to navigate round the bucket to get to them. I walked out of Tescos after one look at the so-called fresh produce suggested that, where food was on offer, it might not be past its sell by date but it was certainly past its eat-by date.
So why is the offer so poor? Was this a one-off? A sign of cutting corners as cost pressures rise? Knowledge that there is not much real competition? A view that the rushed people of W11, having just had a miserable tube experience will be so quickly in and out they won't notice the prices (possibly right), nor the lack of anything much fresh to eat - and if they were fussed they would go to Whole Foods or the new Waitrose - which tells me its in Bayswater, but omitted to say where. Or just decide that its better to watch Gordon Ramsay while eating a takeaway.
The shock was greater because this was my first venture into a supermarket since my operation. I never used to go if I could help it. And shopping by remote control meant that I sent friends to shop -- and then blamed them for coming back with paltry offerings and didn't believe their claims there was nothing much to buy (its Tesco, how can there be no fresh fish/ no decent apples etc etc).
The poor food offer is part of a wider problem of the destruction of Notting Hill Gate which exemplifies clone town features - despite having a potentially tremendous footfall. Estate agents; mobile phone shops; banks galore; the odd surviving independent but unattractive convenience store - but not a baker; no delicatessen; no quality independent greengrocer; a fishmonger but no butcher - and for the rest charity shops - great for dumping junk but not great for buying anything. And chain restaurants.
So we need policies to reclaim the high street - and make it somewhere worth walking to rather than jumping into the car to avoid. For starters, how about a differential business rate - so chains pay more. And some local action like in San Francisco to support more independent stores. There should be a lot of space coming free as estate agents go bust over the next year - so no better time to transform the desert that is Notting Hill Gate?
And now I am off to see if my fond memories of the under threat farmers' market are justified or whether I am ripe for another disappointment.
10.30 a.m update: am now the joyful owner of piles of fresh asparagus; three bunches of carrots with tops on and have just come back from planting tomato plants and mint on my roof terrace -- I love the farmers' market. Now we just need to save it from becoming a Waitrose car park.
Next policy suggestion -- and one that the Competition Commission were not allowed to look at when they did their grocery study as public interest was deleted form their terms of reference in 2004 - make quality and character of high street; encouragement of independent business and diversity of offer part of planning requirements.
Sunday 8 June 2008
Economic naturists
So its looking good for Claire and Spain -- if you note the rapid support-> victory dynamic I created yesterday by my supertips. Even I felt sorry for Federer by the end as he managed only 1.33 games a set versus the all-conquering Mallorcan.... and we did not need to answer the question of whether it was really fair that the women got the same pay as the men for the final of the French open. The one-sided women's final over two sets lasted a whole five minutes less than the - on paper at least - highly competitive men's final.
That sort of question -- why are women paid the same in tennis as men at all Grand Slams except Wimbledon even though they potentially do less work, is just the sort of question Robert Frank addresses in the latest populist economics outing to hit the bestseller lists. A rather lazy book which seems to consist of rewriting a bunch of student essays. But the basic thesis is that most people who study economics don't; become very economically literate -- but that by applying economic thinking to real world situations it becomes possible to - in the book's modest strapline "explain almost everything" and that in the process of doing so we can all become natural economists by applying such principles as opportunity costs - and a few diminishing returns.
So as Frank does it seems to be a good time to try to identify our own examples...am sure you will want to add your own ....but here are some starters for ten..
* why does it make sense for Vodafone to offer me a £ 200 credit for not upgrading my mobile against a new contract worth only £ 300 over the year? and insist that I only take out a 12 month contract rather than lock me in for 18?
* why are all decent women tennis players now from Eastern Europe when tennis is the one sport where the best women can earn on a comparable scale to men?
* why do even small District Councils seem to offer pay rates well in excess of most central government departments?and finally:
* why after years of having no bestselling populist economics books are there now so many on the market?
But I think the answer is that maybe economics - at least conventional neoclassical economics - explains rather less than Professor Frank thinks. It ignores the role of culture; it ignores institutions; and it assumes we are all the rational beasts that we know we are not. And it runs the risk of pretending that there is a rational justification for what just looks like bad business in the case of Vodafone.
That sort of question -- why are women paid the same in tennis as men at all Grand Slams except Wimbledon even though they potentially do less work, is just the sort of question Robert Frank addresses in the latest populist economics outing to hit the bestseller lists. A rather lazy book which seems to consist of rewriting a bunch of student essays. But the basic thesis is that most people who study economics don't; become very economically literate -- but that by applying economic thinking to real world situations it becomes possible to - in the book's modest strapline "explain almost everything" and that in the process of doing so we can all become natural economists by applying such principles as opportunity costs - and a few diminishing returns.
So as Frank does it seems to be a good time to try to identify our own examples...am sure you will want to add your own ....but here are some starters for ten..
* why does it make sense for Vodafone to offer me a £ 200 credit for not upgrading my mobile against a new contract worth only £ 300 over the year? and insist that I only take out a 12 month contract rather than lock me in for 18?
* why are all decent women tennis players now from Eastern Europe when tennis is the one sport where the best women can earn on a comparable scale to men?
* why do even small District Councils seem to offer pay rates well in excess of most central government departments?and finally:
* why after years of having no bestselling populist economics books are there now so many on the market?
But I think the answer is that maybe economics - at least conventional neoclassical economics - explains rather less than Professor Frank thinks. It ignores the role of culture; it ignores institutions; and it assumes we are all the rational beasts that we know we are not. And it runs the risk of pretending that there is a rational justification for what just looks like bad business in the case of Vodafone.
Saturday 7 June 2008
So who will you support?
England -- against New Zealand - at least in this test Match (will let the kiwis have a few one-dayers if it means fireworks from the faux Gilchrist McCullum)
Nadal - to beat Federer tomorrow at the French Open -- and am deeply divided between wanting the smug Swiss to be trounced and wanting a close game -- but I know I want Rafa to win even though I hate his outfits. And that would be true -- in fact even truer - if he was playing the boorish grimacing Scot who fell to the man RN allowed to get three games off him.
Claire - to win the Apprentice - on the basis that she and Alan Sugar deserve each other...
But that is not the question which the BBC is wasting vast amounts of licence payers money trying to get us to answer. In a move which undoubtedly has Norman Tebbit and Bill Cash running to find a grave to turn in, the BBC is desperate to get us to adopt a European country to support at Euro 2008 and so justify their flooding our screens with it through a month which should be dedicated to tennis and cricket and barbecues.
In an age of freeview, interactive and digital, it seems madness to take any of the main four channels and dedicate them to sport - any sport. Even worse when two of them are flogging the same event. Speaking as a sports fan, sport should be on dedicated channels which can do them properly. Whether its Sky or Setanta or a new use for BBC3, sport should be banished form the main airwaves. Eurosport and Sky do tennis better than the BBC which messes up Wimbledon; Sky does cricket perfectly well and has meant you can watch cricket all year round. And in the days of hugely inflated costs for TV rights, it does not make sense for the taxpayer (the TV licence is a tax by any other name) to pay for them when there is a perfectly good alternative delivery vehicle available.
If next year's Ashes can be available only on Sky, then this year's UK free Euro 2008certainly should be.
By the way, the answer is Spain - which it would have been if England had qaulified.... or anyone Scotland was playing in the very unlikely event they ever qualified for a major tournament again. So vamos Torres, Frabregas, Casillas y amigos. But I won't be watching. Unless there is nothing else on.
Nadal - to beat Federer tomorrow at the French Open -- and am deeply divided between wanting the smug Swiss to be trounced and wanting a close game -- but I know I want Rafa to win even though I hate his outfits. And that would be true -- in fact even truer - if he was playing the boorish grimacing Scot who fell to the man RN allowed to get three games off him.
Claire - to win the Apprentice - on the basis that she and Alan Sugar deserve each other...
But that is not the question which the BBC is wasting vast amounts of licence payers money trying to get us to answer. In a move which undoubtedly has Norman Tebbit and Bill Cash running to find a grave to turn in, the BBC is desperate to get us to adopt a European country to support at Euro 2008 and so justify their flooding our screens with it through a month which should be dedicated to tennis and cricket and barbecues.
In an age of freeview, interactive and digital, it seems madness to take any of the main four channels and dedicate them to sport - any sport. Even worse when two of them are flogging the same event. Speaking as a sports fan, sport should be on dedicated channels which can do them properly. Whether its Sky or Setanta or a new use for BBC3, sport should be banished form the main airwaves. Eurosport and Sky do tennis better than the BBC which messes up Wimbledon; Sky does cricket perfectly well and has meant you can watch cricket all year round. And in the days of hugely inflated costs for TV rights, it does not make sense for the taxpayer (the TV licence is a tax by any other name) to pay for them when there is a perfectly good alternative delivery vehicle available.
If next year's Ashes can be available only on Sky, then this year's UK free Euro 2008certainly should be.
By the way, the answer is Spain - which it would have been if England had qaulified.... or anyone Scotland was playing in the very unlikely event they ever qualified for a major tournament again. So vamos Torres, Frabregas, Casillas y amigos. But I won't be watching. Unless there is nothing else on.
Friday 30 May 2008
The wisdom of cabbies
Now that the London election is over, cabbies have something to talk about other than the need to get rid of Ken. So when I decided to nip into a cab today the subject was whether governments have a natural shelf life and why they seem to run out of steam after eight or nine years in office. After all in many other walks of life people are only just starting to get into their career stride after that sort of period.
The taxi driver and I were trying to work out why - if this is indeed true - this might happen.
First, new governments have had a lot of time in opposition to think about what they want to do - and have time to plan how to hit the ground running. In government its much harder to find the time to think new thoughts - the day-to-day grind of government gets in the way. And increasing amounts of time have to be spent defending the record rather than thinking what to do next.
Second, while the quality of Cabinets probably gets better a couple of years into government with the sieving out of those who happened to be in the right place at the change and the chance to bring on new talent, over time there is quite a high rate of talent attrition - through death, disgrace, disagreement or disillusion - and the pool does not seem to regenerate.
Third, the link between the politicians and their advisers diminishes -- as the advisers either move into formal politics or into money-making - and the people providing advice are less close to the people they are advising.
Fourth, the people at the top - or some of them - probably just get tired. Government is a seven day a week business. The pressure is relentless. News this week that the new PM of Australia is causing mayhem in the public service by expecting them to match his 5.15 am starts does not necessarily bode well for his ability to do a John Howard and last for years. One reason why Ken Clarke seemed to keep his bounciness to the end was that he refused to do the Today programme before 8.10 and still went to Ronnie Scott's, Notts Forest and Trent Bridge and birding rather then be Chancellor 24.7.
And finally, events just catch up. The length of time that you can go on blaming the legacy has some limitations. Inevitable failures start to stack up and the positives get taken for granted. And people begin to forget why they chucked out the other lot....
The Americans save themselves the problem with term limits -- which in some cases has the bizarre effect of leaving the public wanting more. Its arguable that we should have term limits for Mayor. But term limits don't work in a Parliamentary system - so we seem to have moved from a one full term electoral cycle to a more natural twelve year cycle. At least that was what the cabbie thought.
The taxi driver and I were trying to work out why - if this is indeed true - this might happen.
First, new governments have had a lot of time in opposition to think about what they want to do - and have time to plan how to hit the ground running. In government its much harder to find the time to think new thoughts - the day-to-day grind of government gets in the way. And increasing amounts of time have to be spent defending the record rather than thinking what to do next.
Second, while the quality of Cabinets probably gets better a couple of years into government with the sieving out of those who happened to be in the right place at the change and the chance to bring on new talent, over time there is quite a high rate of talent attrition - through death, disgrace, disagreement or disillusion - and the pool does not seem to regenerate.
Third, the link between the politicians and their advisers diminishes -- as the advisers either move into formal politics or into money-making - and the people providing advice are less close to the people they are advising.
Fourth, the people at the top - or some of them - probably just get tired. Government is a seven day a week business. The pressure is relentless. News this week that the new PM of Australia is causing mayhem in the public service by expecting them to match his 5.15 am starts does not necessarily bode well for his ability to do a John Howard and last for years. One reason why Ken Clarke seemed to keep his bounciness to the end was that he refused to do the Today programme before 8.10 and still went to Ronnie Scott's, Notts Forest and Trent Bridge and birding rather then be Chancellor 24.7.
And finally, events just catch up. The length of time that you can go on blaming the legacy has some limitations. Inevitable failures start to stack up and the positives get taken for granted. And people begin to forget why they chucked out the other lot....
The Americans save themselves the problem with term limits -- which in some cases has the bizarre effect of leaving the public wanting more. Its arguable that we should have term limits for Mayor. But term limits don't work in a Parliamentary system - so we seem to have moved from a one full term electoral cycle to a more natural twelve year cycle. At least that was what the cabbie thought.
Sunday 25 May 2008
The triumph of eurovision
So much is being written about the Crewe and Nantwich result that the time has come to focus on the other poll which is receiving coverage today - the outcome of Eurovision. UK last, Russia first and our song outcompeted by assorted Balkan and FSU weirdos - all down to dastardly coalition voting. Clear that we have no coalition beyond Ireland (who gave us 8 points) and San Marino (6 points). Doesn't augur well for CAP reform. Even our oldest ally, Portugal, gave 12 points to an appalling effort from Spain and nada to us - maybe as revenge over the Lisbon treaty. (lets you are concerned this means I actually watched eurovision, I will admit only to watching the voting - certainly not the songs... which are not where the action is).
So Terry Wogan is threatening to quit; serious debate on whether we should stalk off in a huff and create an alternative competition to give Western Europe a chance as we - apart from the Norwegians who seemed to get 5 points from everyone - and other Western countries no longer have the opportunity to show their best face to the world with great songs such as Congratulations, Boom-Bang-a-Bang etc.
But in the week when Moscow had to pay host to two sets of English fans, in a League where our money increasingly prices out anyone's else's ability to compete, it seems churlish to resent giving the poorer and more marginalised countries of Europe a stage on which they can have eyes on the prize - and vote for each other if they want. Much more heartening to see Croats voting for Serbs in Eurovision (I think they did at least) than taking chunks out of each other. And we can sit back smugly and note that the Russian winner was singing in at least some sort of English - as were 95% of the other entrants. So while England may not have won, English certainly has.
So Sir Terry needs to relax and embrace the new Europe. And maybe we ought to be prepared to give up our automatic right of entry - and suffer the same fate as the Irish turkey.
So Terry Wogan is threatening to quit; serious debate on whether we should stalk off in a huff and create an alternative competition to give Western Europe a chance as we - apart from the Norwegians who seemed to get 5 points from everyone - and other Western countries no longer have the opportunity to show their best face to the world with great songs such as Congratulations, Boom-Bang-a-Bang etc.
But in the week when Moscow had to pay host to two sets of English fans, in a League where our money increasingly prices out anyone's else's ability to compete, it seems churlish to resent giving the poorer and more marginalised countries of Europe a stage on which they can have eyes on the prize - and vote for each other if they want. Much more heartening to see Croats voting for Serbs in Eurovision (I think they did at least) than taking chunks out of each other. And we can sit back smugly and note that the Russian winner was singing in at least some sort of English - as were 95% of the other entrants. So while England may not have won, English certainly has.
So Sir Terry needs to relax and embrace the new Europe. And maybe we ought to be prepared to give up our automatic right of entry - and suffer the same fate as the Irish turkey.
Monday 19 May 2008
Out for a duck
Not a comment on the Saturday test washout - frustrating thought that was. Just back from last trip to physio - no need to see him again. Months ahead of schedule(well one month ahead of the schedule he thought for me, and another month ahead of where a less diligent patient would be!). Allowed back on bike and we agreed that living up ninety stairs was a GOOD THING as built exercise into daily regime. No one dare ever complain about that again - including me.
Only problem is mallard like gait. So am being sent off to a podiatrist to see if he can do a shoe insert to make me walk more like a person and less like a duck.
Meanwhile have got new regime at the gym - including some nasty exercises on those oversized beach balls. But since am down in Chichester today am going for a pensioner swim this afternoon - and hopefully will avoid the cunning speed camera that nabbed me a few weeks back and got me my first ever speeding ticket.
Only problem is mallard like gait. So am being sent off to a podiatrist to see if he can do a shoe insert to make me walk more like a person and less like a duck.
Meanwhile have got new regime at the gym - including some nasty exercises on those oversized beach balls. But since am down in Chichester today am going for a pensioner swim this afternoon - and hopefully will avoid the cunning speed camera that nabbed me a few weeks back and got me my first ever speeding ticket.
Major revision
Since even Rory Bremner has seen fit to dust off his John Major impression (good Surrey tie and undoubtedly more fun than trying to do David Cameron and George Osborne) and JM now seems to be the benchmark for all things poor in a Prime Minister, it seems a good time to try to recall those not so halcyon days of the 1990s when JM was at the helm. And for those of you who have not read my CV, I should declare an interest as JM is undoubtedly the politician I know and have known best, as his Private Secretary as Chief Secretary at HMT, and then again in the Policy Unit at No.10.
One thing everyone forgets about John Major is that he was actually Prime Minister for a very long time - six and a half years - no Paul Martin and Kim Campbell he (short-lived Canadian PMs - check them out on wikipedia). Everyone remembers that he squeaked a chancy - Labour not quite ready, not sure about the welsh bloke election - in 1992 - but before that he was really quite popular. Partly because he wasn't Thatcher, but also because he defused the political time bomb of the day - the poll tax - with the council tax, because he did genuinely change the style of government to a more collegiate basis and partly because he seemed quite nice and normal. And remember that at the time, Maastricht was seen as a major (joke - he had to suffer a lot of those) negotiating triumph.
One of JM's problems was that his meteoric rise to the top meant that he did not come to No.10 with any particular agenda - and indeed was not elected on a particular mandate other than not being Heseltine. But the seeds of destruction of his Premiership were only in one respect self-sown - the decision to join the ERM in 1990 at too high a rate - though the consensus view at the time. For the rest what wrecked his Premiership was partly the country's fatigue with the Tories vs a still only semi electable Labour party, partly the legacy of the last 1980s boom and bust, but mainly the fact that the Tories failed to recover from the divisions over the manner of Thatcher's exit, and the fact that they were really deeply and genuinely split over Europe. To manage all that with a majority of 20 was the near impossibility that provided the backdrop to Major's last five years -- and to do that when your biggest move as Chancellor had backfired spectacularly was beyond impossible.
The need to get the Maastricht Bill through at almost all costs - with all votes on eh knife edge provided the background for all the time I was at No. 10. But despite that - even though there were some mad gesture politics going on to appease the right with Back to Basics as the nadir - the Major government does deserve to be remembered for some positive things. The Good Friday agreement would never have happened so quickly without the foundations being laid by the Downing Street declaration. The post ERM regime put in place by Lamont and then Clarke laid the foundations for Bank of England independence and they managed their way out of the early 1990s recession and took some tough decisions to get the pubic finances back on track. And the council tax - whatever its faults - has stuck.
So maybe there are worse things than being compared to John Major - and maybe the time is due for a Major revision.
One thing everyone forgets about John Major is that he was actually Prime Minister for a very long time - six and a half years - no Paul Martin and Kim Campbell he (short-lived Canadian PMs - check them out on wikipedia). Everyone remembers that he squeaked a chancy - Labour not quite ready, not sure about the welsh bloke election - in 1992 - but before that he was really quite popular. Partly because he wasn't Thatcher, but also because he defused the political time bomb of the day - the poll tax - with the council tax, because he did genuinely change the style of government to a more collegiate basis and partly because he seemed quite nice and normal. And remember that at the time, Maastricht was seen as a major (joke - he had to suffer a lot of those) negotiating triumph.
One of JM's problems was that his meteoric rise to the top meant that he did not come to No.10 with any particular agenda - and indeed was not elected on a particular mandate other than not being Heseltine. But the seeds of destruction of his Premiership were only in one respect self-sown - the decision to join the ERM in 1990 at too high a rate - though the consensus view at the time. For the rest what wrecked his Premiership was partly the country's fatigue with the Tories vs a still only semi electable Labour party, partly the legacy of the last 1980s boom and bust, but mainly the fact that the Tories failed to recover from the divisions over the manner of Thatcher's exit, and the fact that they were really deeply and genuinely split over Europe. To manage all that with a majority of 20 was the near impossibility that provided the backdrop to Major's last five years -- and to do that when your biggest move as Chancellor had backfired spectacularly was beyond impossible.
The need to get the Maastricht Bill through at almost all costs - with all votes on eh knife edge provided the background for all the time I was at No. 10. But despite that - even though there were some mad gesture politics going on to appease the right with Back to Basics as the nadir - the Major government does deserve to be remembered for some positive things. The Good Friday agreement would never have happened so quickly without the foundations being laid by the Downing Street declaration. The post ERM regime put in place by Lamont and then Clarke laid the foundations for Bank of England independence and they managed their way out of the early 1990s recession and took some tough decisions to get the pubic finances back on track. And the council tax - whatever its faults - has stuck.
So maybe there are worse things than being compared to John Major - and maybe the time is due for a Major revision.
Sunday 11 May 2008
Too hot to blog
as the thermometer rises, it just doesn't seem to make sense to spend precious free time in front of the computer rather than enjoying a massive dose of Vitamin D. So no thoughts this weekend ...
It's of course not just the temperature that is rising, but the febrile political atmosphere which is curbing my scope for blogging. Almost anything worth commenting on (except maybe wondering why Surrey have no bowling whatsoever) will be seen through the lens of what is going on at Westminster, City Hall or even Edinburgh. It's not just that though. Returning to work has been good - sort of. What two months off through had made me forget was the sheer weight of the corporate overhead. Have been spending days doing interviews -- all based on competencies - with helpful guidance form HR that allowing people to spin their past is a much better way of interviewing than asking people to show you have any really interesting take on the job you are applying for, any ideas you want to put into practise and any concept of the difference between your current job and the next one. Past performance in a different job may not always be the best guide to success in a new one....
And despite Gus O'Donnell's great desire for passion in the civil service, I have someone protesting that it was unreasonable asking someone applying to run the Defra as sustainability leader programme whether they could think of a time in their past when they had successfully applied SD principles to a policy. So no room for passion (or even commonsense in interview preparation) there.
But at least the weather is great for now. Am getting bouncier and bouncier as can go for reasonable walks without the crutch and gym regime appears to be paying off (though am having to make up a lot of post hoc justification about building muscle as weight appears to be increasing). But the First test starts next week -- will probably be shivering at Lords next Saturday.
It's of course not just the temperature that is rising, but the febrile political atmosphere which is curbing my scope for blogging. Almost anything worth commenting on (except maybe wondering why Surrey have no bowling whatsoever) will be seen through the lens of what is going on at Westminster, City Hall or even Edinburgh. It's not just that though. Returning to work has been good - sort of. What two months off through had made me forget was the sheer weight of the corporate overhead. Have been spending days doing interviews -- all based on competencies - with helpful guidance form HR that allowing people to spin their past is a much better way of interviewing than asking people to show you have any really interesting take on the job you are applying for, any ideas you want to put into practise and any concept of the difference between your current job and the next one. Past performance in a different job may not always be the best guide to success in a new one....
And despite Gus O'Donnell's great desire for passion in the civil service, I have someone protesting that it was unreasonable asking someone applying to run the Defra as sustainability leader programme whether they could think of a time in their past when they had successfully applied SD principles to a policy. So no room for passion (or even commonsense in interview preparation) there.
But at least the weather is great for now. Am getting bouncier and bouncier as can go for reasonable walks without the crutch and gym regime appears to be paying off (though am having to make up a lot of post hoc justification about building muscle as weight appears to be increasing). But the First test starts next week -- will probably be shivering at Lords next Saturday.
Monday 5 May 2008
Use of evidence
Its a long time ago but there used to be a course in Law at Oxford called "use of evidence" (at least I think there was...). And in our adversarial system of law that means cleverness in selecting facts to support a predetermined thesis (usually - it wasn't me, gov...). But at least there there is a judge and jury to try to adjudicate between two competing half-truths.
But it's interesting how that approach to evidence has morphed into the public arena - again a product of adversarial government - between parties but also between competing government agencies who feel a need to "campaign" at other bits of government - or the public. I was reminded of this at the weekend by reviews of a book on the Aids epidemic ("The Wisdom of Whores" by Elisabeth Pisani) - where describing the competition for Aids funding UNAids had to beef up data to suggest that there was likely to be mass spread of Aids into the general population in the developed West in order to attract funding and political attention. Horrific numbers of deaths among marginalised communities and across marginalised continents were not enough.
There is a tendency to do the same now where evidence is selected to back a thesis - rather than allow the thesis to emerge from the evidence - a point put very nicely (as it were) by the head of Public Health at NICE in a seminar we had recently at Defra. Their comparative advantage - he claimed - was that they reviewed all the evidence - rather that find the evidence that worked. And the good news there is that - even with a very limited evidence base - most public health interventions they have looked at are incredibly cost-effective.
But if the temptations within government are to pick the evidence to back a thesis, the temptation in NGOs is near irresistible. NGOs see themselves as advocates - they are there to make a case. Bjorn Lomborg (squeals of anguish...not least at the fact that he dared to question these paragons of public virtue) has done much to expose some of the half-truths of some of the environmental movement - but my favourite example came from the case of the Canadian Cancer Society where employees were banned form mentioning the number of cancer deaths in Canada - because the top of the organisation realised that in a war to the death with the Heart Foundation they would lose if people realised that coronary disease was still the top killer. Not much chance of a rational debate on health priorities there...
If everyone treated NGO evidence with a hearty pinch of salt, none of this would matter. But people don't. Evidence suggests that most of the pubic regard NGOs as more trustworthy than government and certainly than politicians. They may be nicer people (though not sure there is any evidence of that), but it is naive not to recognise that they are less held to account even than government and have more incentives to abuse evidence to support their one-sided view of the world - and to panic the rest of us into financial support for them.
One of the interesting political developments over the past thirty years is how NGOs have changed form being regarded as "pressure groups" - the language of the 1970s where they were seen as a peculiarly US phenomenon to be studied with a degree of haughty distaste as nasty self-interested people trying to influence legislation for their own ends into being "stakeholders" - nice, fluffy people who deserve an inside track in forming government policy. Of course there is a world of difference between the tax lobbyists trying to reduce their clients tax bills - and the public interest lobbyists trying to put up other people's. But there still needs to be a sceptical approach. The latter's motives may not be selfish - but they do still have a high degree of organisational self-interest - and simply claiming you are acting in the public interest does not mean you necessarily have an - unelected - right to determine what that is.
So we need more intelligent consuming of NGOs by government and the media; better recognition of their pluses and minuses; more holding to account of them and tier trustees for what they say - and for government to make clear it has a very high standard of evidence - and that others need to meet it if they are to be taken seriously.
But it's interesting how that approach to evidence has morphed into the public arena - again a product of adversarial government - between parties but also between competing government agencies who feel a need to "campaign" at other bits of government - or the public. I was reminded of this at the weekend by reviews of a book on the Aids epidemic ("The Wisdom of Whores" by Elisabeth Pisani) - where describing the competition for Aids funding UNAids had to beef up data to suggest that there was likely to be mass spread of Aids into the general population in the developed West in order to attract funding and political attention. Horrific numbers of deaths among marginalised communities and across marginalised continents were not enough.
There is a tendency to do the same now where evidence is selected to back a thesis - rather than allow the thesis to emerge from the evidence - a point put very nicely (as it were) by the head of Public Health at NICE in a seminar we had recently at Defra. Their comparative advantage - he claimed - was that they reviewed all the evidence - rather that find the evidence that worked. And the good news there is that - even with a very limited evidence base - most public health interventions they have looked at are incredibly cost-effective.
But if the temptations within government are to pick the evidence to back a thesis, the temptation in NGOs is near irresistible. NGOs see themselves as advocates - they are there to make a case. Bjorn Lomborg (squeals of anguish...not least at the fact that he dared to question these paragons of public virtue) has done much to expose some of the half-truths of some of the environmental movement - but my favourite example came from the case of the Canadian Cancer Society where employees were banned form mentioning the number of cancer deaths in Canada - because the top of the organisation realised that in a war to the death with the Heart Foundation they would lose if people realised that coronary disease was still the top killer. Not much chance of a rational debate on health priorities there...
If everyone treated NGO evidence with a hearty pinch of salt, none of this would matter. But people don't. Evidence suggests that most of the pubic regard NGOs as more trustworthy than government and certainly than politicians. They may be nicer people (though not sure there is any evidence of that), but it is naive not to recognise that they are less held to account even than government and have more incentives to abuse evidence to support their one-sided view of the world - and to panic the rest of us into financial support for them.
One of the interesting political developments over the past thirty years is how NGOs have changed form being regarded as "pressure groups" - the language of the 1970s where they were seen as a peculiarly US phenomenon to be studied with a degree of haughty distaste as nasty self-interested people trying to influence legislation for their own ends into being "stakeholders" - nice, fluffy people who deserve an inside track in forming government policy. Of course there is a world of difference between the tax lobbyists trying to reduce their clients tax bills - and the public interest lobbyists trying to put up other people's. But there still needs to be a sceptical approach. The latter's motives may not be selfish - but they do still have a high degree of organisational self-interest - and simply claiming you are acting in the public interest does not mean you necessarily have an - unelected - right to determine what that is.
So we need more intelligent consuming of NGOs by government and the media; better recognition of their pluses and minuses; more holding to account of them and tier trustees for what they say - and for government to make clear it has a very high standard of evidence - and that others need to meet it if they are to be taken seriously.
Sunday 4 May 2008
The first casualty
So the fallout continues apace from last week's elections -- and the first casualty looks like being the environment.
First, the pathetic performance of the Greens in the London mayoral result (even with the ideal opportunity for a gesture vote on the first round) showed a measly 3.15% support. Not exactly a sign of the power of the Green movement to make more traditional parties quake in their electoral boots.
Second, the fact that Ken seemed to get no political kudos from his ambitious climate change targets in a London debate that focused on crime, corruption and bendy buses. Not a single question at the debate I went to on Monday.
Third, the promised Boris review of the congestion charge. As the drivers of gas guzzlers sleep more easily that they will be able to terrorise the rest of us off the streets, the review could be good news... skip the misguided view that some cars are OK in central London; review the absurd westward extension which has given the residents of W8 and SW3 a licence to drive at a discount into the centre while penalising all the residents of poorer neighbouring boroughs... but the risk is that this is all seen about easing the burden on motorists. And Boris seems to regard cycling as something to be confined to eccentric old Etonians and tourists -- not as something to be mainstreamed through London.
And finally, already briefings coming out that the listening and learning puts questionmarks over waste charging; the fuel duty rise (decision not needed until September... so why decide now?) and a suggestion that the PM should give up his passion for Africa and climate change. Not clear that Thursday's election results suggested that Africa was any nearer stability and prosperity, nor that climate change is any less of a threat.
We are clearly back into the stage of the political cycle where everything has to be calibrated against the backdrop of minute short-term political calculation - or at least everything except anti-terrorist measures. So the environment goes into cold storage to wait for happier times to return. Or is there anyone - outside the marginalised green movement - up for arguing that the environment is important, even when we aren't all feeling rich and bouncy?
First, the pathetic performance of the Greens in the London mayoral result (even with the ideal opportunity for a gesture vote on the first round) showed a measly 3.15% support. Not exactly a sign of the power of the Green movement to make more traditional parties quake in their electoral boots.
Second, the fact that Ken seemed to get no political kudos from his ambitious climate change targets in a London debate that focused on crime, corruption and bendy buses. Not a single question at the debate I went to on Monday.
Third, the promised Boris review of the congestion charge. As the drivers of gas guzzlers sleep more easily that they will be able to terrorise the rest of us off the streets, the review could be good news... skip the misguided view that some cars are OK in central London; review the absurd westward extension which has given the residents of W8 and SW3 a licence to drive at a discount into the centre while penalising all the residents of poorer neighbouring boroughs... but the risk is that this is all seen about easing the burden on motorists. And Boris seems to regard cycling as something to be confined to eccentric old Etonians and tourists -- not as something to be mainstreamed through London.
And finally, already briefings coming out that the listening and learning puts questionmarks over waste charging; the fuel duty rise (decision not needed until September... so why decide now?) and a suggestion that the PM should give up his passion for Africa and climate change. Not clear that Thursday's election results suggested that Africa was any nearer stability and prosperity, nor that climate change is any less of a threat.
We are clearly back into the stage of the political cycle where everything has to be calibrated against the backdrop of minute short-term political calculation - or at least everything except anti-terrorist measures. So the environment goes into cold storage to wait for happier times to return. Or is there anyone - outside the marginalised green movement - up for arguing that the environment is important, even when we aren't all feeling rich and bouncy?
Friday 2 May 2008
Victory!!!!
No - not an early glimpse of the London mayoral result -- we seem to have another three hours to wait as of now - but the verdict from my visit to the consultant on Wednesday. Not sure I would normally rejoice in spending £ 300 for a couple of photos that you can't exactly stick in an album and a brief chat about the merits of Setanta Sports (recommended by the way - not just for IPL but NHL as well -- doctor is a bit of a hockey head) - but worth paying for the verdict that everything going very well; implant now cemented in place and all I need now is to get muscles in shape.... and then the world is proverbial oyster (or mussel as I don't like oysters much).
So beginning to emerge from three months in which - well not much has changed: Democrats still don't know who their Presidential candidate is going to be; economy not looking very perky; we still don't know who will win the Premiership; we still don't have a President of Zimbabwe; polls still suggest general election two years away; we don't know who will be Sir Alan's apprentice or "Nancy". The only things that have changed are that Evan has worked out how not to "crash the pips" on the Today programme; people have started worrying about prices again - both those going up - food, petrol and those going down - houses; and some time later tonight a lot of cabbies may be celebrating the demise of Ken. One of the things that does seem to have changed is that traffic in London has got worse while I was away ... but that may be more a function of sitting watching taxi meters gobble cash instead of sailing past on the bike.
So next appointment in January.... will anything have changed by then?
So beginning to emerge from three months in which - well not much has changed: Democrats still don't know who their Presidential candidate is going to be; economy not looking very perky; we still don't know who will win the Premiership; we still don't have a President of Zimbabwe; polls still suggest general election two years away; we don't know who will be Sir Alan's apprentice or "Nancy". The only things that have changed are that Evan has worked out how not to "crash the pips" on the Today programme; people have started worrying about prices again - both those going up - food, petrol and those going down - houses; and some time later tonight a lot of cabbies may be celebrating the demise of Ken. One of the things that does seem to have changed is that traffic in London has got worse while I was away ... but that may be more a function of sitting watching taxi meters gobble cash instead of sailing past on the bike.
So next appointment in January.... will anything have changed by then?
Sunday 27 April 2008
The other Presidential election
One of my great regrets of having been spending months down at my mother's pleasure in Chichester is that I have been missing out on the great spectacle of Ken v Boris v Brian v Sian v a selection of other parties many of whom I have never heard of before in the contest for the only political office I would really like to have - Mayor of London. That changes tomorrow when I am going to a live Mayoral debate - I can hardly wait... and I need to remember the rather convoluted question about the westward extension of the congestion charge I said I wanted to ask. But I am sure they won't ask me.... at least I hope so as the debate is then broadcast on Sky News.
But what has come true - at least in certain London restaurants - is that this is a contest that has engaged people... whether on the level of how on earth did a city like London end up with these candidates; to the agonies of what to do with that precious second vote, knowing that what might be best for London could also have unintended national repercussions. And then there is the need to remember just how the system works -- no ones and twos but a column one X and a column two X. And no "none of the above options". And for someone who has always lived in a dull Parliamentary constituency, there is finally a contest where someone can be slightly bothered to go after my vote.
I was flicking through the manifestos as helpfully summarised by Anthony Mayer (for whom I worked on the poll tax - bet he doesn't admit that much around County Hall) who turns out to be the GLA returning officer. One side of A5 probably doesn't offer much scope for sophisticated policy offerings but there was a definite hint of headline populism about most of what was being proposed. And one policy that everyone seemed to have was to lift the curfew on the so-called Twerlies.... those people with Freedom Passes who have at the moment to wait until 9.30 to get on the tubes and buses. I only discovered the concept of the Twerly (based on eager over 60s waiting at bus stops asking "is it too early" at 9.27) at a No. 10 reunion dinner party where Rachel Lomax (Deputy Governor of the Bank of England), Sir Roderic Lyne (former Ambo to Moscow and now consultant to mega-capitalism) and Lord Turnbull (he of Macavity and Stalin and also not short of a non-executive chairmanship or three) were all waxing lyrical about their freedom passes. And indeed coming down to Victoria on Friday I saw a 9.34 Norman Lamont get on the 148 bus to his Mayfair employer -- a man who told me during the last Mayoral contest that he thought Ken had done great things for the buses when he discovered he could get a bus virtually door-to-door for nothing instead of a taxi for rather a lot.. So do we want all these people taking up our seats for nothing before 9.30? Is anyone on the side of London;s workers?
So since I can't remember my question for tomorrow, maybe I will ask which candidate will get the Twerlies under control and promise not to let them compete with honest farepayers who need to work to live rather than supplement already generous pensions.
Further update post debate... and meanwhile, more milestones... first trip on bus unaccompanied (may find it hard to break the taxi habit; first outing without any crutch!!!). Bottomline is I just keep on bouncing.
But what has come true - at least in certain London restaurants - is that this is a contest that has engaged people... whether on the level of how on earth did a city like London end up with these candidates; to the agonies of what to do with that precious second vote, knowing that what might be best for London could also have unintended national repercussions. And then there is the need to remember just how the system works -- no ones and twos but a column one X and a column two X. And no "none of the above options". And for someone who has always lived in a dull Parliamentary constituency, there is finally a contest where someone can be slightly bothered to go after my vote.
I was flicking through the manifestos as helpfully summarised by Anthony Mayer (for whom I worked on the poll tax - bet he doesn't admit that much around County Hall) who turns out to be the GLA returning officer. One side of A5 probably doesn't offer much scope for sophisticated policy offerings but there was a definite hint of headline populism about most of what was being proposed. And one policy that everyone seemed to have was to lift the curfew on the so-called Twerlies.... those people with Freedom Passes who have at the moment to wait until 9.30 to get on the tubes and buses. I only discovered the concept of the Twerly (based on eager over 60s waiting at bus stops asking "is it too early" at 9.27) at a No. 10 reunion dinner party where Rachel Lomax (Deputy Governor of the Bank of England), Sir Roderic Lyne (former Ambo to Moscow and now consultant to mega-capitalism) and Lord Turnbull (he of Macavity and Stalin and also not short of a non-executive chairmanship or three) were all waxing lyrical about their freedom passes. And indeed coming down to Victoria on Friday I saw a 9.34 Norman Lamont get on the 148 bus to his Mayfair employer -- a man who told me during the last Mayoral contest that he thought Ken had done great things for the buses when he discovered he could get a bus virtually door-to-door for nothing instead of a taxi for rather a lot.. So do we want all these people taking up our seats for nothing before 9.30? Is anyone on the side of London;s workers?
So since I can't remember my question for tomorrow, maybe I will ask which candidate will get the Twerlies under control and promise not to let them compete with honest farepayers who need to work to live rather than supplement already generous pensions.
Further update post debate... and meanwhile, more milestones... first trip on bus unaccompanied (may find it hard to break the taxi habit; first outing without any crutch!!!). Bottomline is I just keep on bouncing.
Saturday 19 April 2008
None of the above
Bad weekend on blogging front... too many distractions -- and new hyper activity regime is distracting from time available (though interesting blogger made it to scrambled word on the backpage of the Times today).
So if I had had time I was going to blog on the merits of Gwynneth Dunwoody vs Zapatero's Ministras; and on our misconceptions of Spain; on the frustration of discovering the IPL was on setanta (to subscribe or not to subscribe, that is the question) and the start of the English cricket season; on whether reality TV was racist .. but instead I went to the gym and the good news is that it is paying off...
Physio today said I was three to four weeks ahead of schedule... not sure what his base was, but this seems to be good news... so its bigger weights, join gym in London and then, sometime in May its more dynamic exercise... first time I have ever found the prospect of getting on a treadmill exciting..
So if I had had time I was going to blog on the merits of Gwynneth Dunwoody vs Zapatero's Ministras; and on our misconceptions of Spain; on the frustration of discovering the IPL was on setanta (to subscribe or not to subscribe, that is the question) and the start of the English cricket season; on whether reality TV was racist .. but instead I went to the gym and the good news is that it is paying off...
Physio today said I was three to four weeks ahead of schedule... not sure what his base was, but this seems to be good news... so its bigger weights, join gym in London and then, sometime in May its more dynamic exercise... first time I have ever found the prospect of getting on a treadmill exciting..
Friday 18 April 2008
Night off
Apologies for blog drought -- but busy(ish) week at work and return of social life. So Tuesday was dinner with bonus private view thrown in, Wednesday hobnobbing at the tennis club (but not playing - am officially "non-playing" now) and discussing London elections with bunches of Boristas, and Thursday the theatre.
First theatre trip this year and the light relief was a play about a life spent aiming to be Prime Minister, which ends with a government in chaos and departure from Downing Street in failure. But it was Jeremy Irons, not Rory Bremner, and the PM in question was Harold Macmillan. Some very big psychological flaws on display - pushy mother worried son would never quite make it; frustrated flirtation with catholicism; near death experience in the Somme... resulting in lifelong haunting by alter ego of non-dead Captain Macmillan. Quite an interesting romp through 20th century -- though a bit of history for dummies. And some really clunky dialogue - and some rather obvious anachronisms -- did Selwyn Lloyd really agonise about what the plan was for post-war reconstruction of Egypt after the Suez planned regime change? But the audience liked it.
But interesting nonetheless... not least to see how government was in meltdown the week I was born (Suez + Hungarian uprising) and what the special relationship felt like then, albeit with the UK as gung-ho aggressor. But the real star were the sets and the recreation of the Somme, the Algerian desert (HM not only survived the Somme, he survived a plane crash in North Africa -- and as far as this shows a vast amount of champagne and cigarettes). Politicians in those days had a rather more lively past than being a Spad and then a brief period after getting a seat and before being elected as a communications consultant.
But although the author tried to make the parallels with today in a rather heavy-handed way, what it really looked like by the end was the Major government. A Chancellor becomes PM; lasting legacy is popularising gambling - Premium bonds vs the lottery; initially popular but then is derailed by European humiliation (though De Gaulle rather than Bill Cash and IDS) and sex scandals -- though Profumo was rather more stylish than David Mellor in a Chelsea strip. Not sure a Major nostalgia evening was quite what Howard Brenton had in mind....
First theatre trip this year and the light relief was a play about a life spent aiming to be Prime Minister, which ends with a government in chaos and departure from Downing Street in failure. But it was Jeremy Irons, not Rory Bremner, and the PM in question was Harold Macmillan. Some very big psychological flaws on display - pushy mother worried son would never quite make it; frustrated flirtation with catholicism; near death experience in the Somme... resulting in lifelong haunting by alter ego of non-dead Captain Macmillan. Quite an interesting romp through 20th century -- though a bit of history for dummies. And some really clunky dialogue - and some rather obvious anachronisms -- did Selwyn Lloyd really agonise about what the plan was for post-war reconstruction of Egypt after the Suez planned regime change? But the audience liked it.
But interesting nonetheless... not least to see how government was in meltdown the week I was born (Suez + Hungarian uprising) and what the special relationship felt like then, albeit with the UK as gung-ho aggressor. But the real star were the sets and the recreation of the Somme, the Algerian desert (HM not only survived the Somme, he survived a plane crash in North Africa -- and as far as this shows a vast amount of champagne and cigarettes). Politicians in those days had a rather more lively past than being a Spad and then a brief period after getting a seat and before being elected as a communications consultant.
But although the author tried to make the parallels with today in a rather heavy-handed way, what it really looked like by the end was the Major government. A Chancellor becomes PM; lasting legacy is popularising gambling - Premium bonds vs the lottery; initially popular but then is derailed by European humiliation (though De Gaulle rather than Bill Cash and IDS) and sex scandals -- though Profumo was rather more stylish than David Mellor in a Chelsea strip. Not sure a Major nostalgia evening was quite what Howard Brenton had in mind....
Saturday 12 April 2008
Storm re a teacake
Most people have an enduring affection for the UK's VAT zero rates - the main exceptions are the hapless individuals who have spent time answering correspondence from the mothers of oversize children who can't understand why supersized Jeremy has to pay VAT on his school blazer while anorexic forty year olds can buy the latest size zeros in Topshop VAT free.
But while the children's clothing zero rate usually generates the biggest postbag, it is the food borderline that verges in the surreal -- something I had forgotten until the issue reared its ugly head again with the decision vs HMRC in re M and S teacake this week (it looked more like a chocolate marshmallow to me - but as they could say in Spain - yo que se?). The borderline was not at issue here -- that had been decided N years ago - but it still looks pretty odd. For those of you not up with VAT intricacies, the key and much disputed issue re teacakes, jaffa cakes etc etc, is what is a cake (VAT rate zero) and what is a biscuit (VAT rate 17.5%). The alleged test is whether aforesaid object softens on ageing (= biscuit) or hardens (= cake). But what nobody seems to question (and what probably only Alex Allan as a C and E neophyte in the 70s knows) was why cakes are deemed worthy of a zero rate and the evil biscuit attracts the full whack....
The tax purist would argue that the right answer (and how many times did we dream of this in the Chancellor's Private Office) would be a single uniform VAT rate across the whole economy. But the advent of the EU minimum standard rate of 15% in 1992 probably put paid to that (the fiscally neutral equivalent used to be about 12%).
But now that food policy is back on the agenda -- alongside increasing concerns about the expanding national waistline - there might be a case for looking again at some of the oddities of the VAT treatment of food. So given that a uniform move to 17.5% looks a courageous Chancellorial move too far, it might be a start to move cakes to the other side of the borderline - a healthy cake is pretty much of an oxymoron.
Having started there, and notwithstanding Delia's latest attempts in "How to cheat" to convince us that processed is best - or at least OK - how about 17.5% on all processed food - and keep the zero rate just for that nice fresh stuff - whether from Kent or Kenya. Or 17.5% on anything that has red or amber on a food label - which owed probably amount to much the same thing. Come on Jamie -- your next campaign?
Of course I realise that there will be scope for more arguments. Is UHT milk processed or not? what about those innocent smoothies (fruit juices and blended fruit drinks like smoothies are now at 17.5% alongside Coke and Sunny Delight -- HMRC believes food - however rich in e numbers - is an essential of life but beverages aren't)? what about the frozen peas so beloved of Gordon Ramsay and our top chefs? Anyone for Birds Eye v HMRC?
Still, a serious look at the way we tax food seems about 36 years overdue - and that is before we start thinking up new ideas like the famed but stillborn PMSU fat tax. But once we have started out making more sense of VAT we can start looking at what 21st century sins we want to target with excise duties.
But while the children's clothing zero rate usually generates the biggest postbag, it is the food borderline that verges in the surreal -- something I had forgotten until the issue reared its ugly head again with the decision vs HMRC in re M and S teacake this week (it looked more like a chocolate marshmallow to me - but as they could say in Spain - yo que se?). The borderline was not at issue here -- that had been decided N years ago - but it still looks pretty odd. For those of you not up with VAT intricacies, the key and much disputed issue re teacakes, jaffa cakes etc etc, is what is a cake (VAT rate zero) and what is a biscuit (VAT rate 17.5%). The alleged test is whether aforesaid object softens on ageing (= biscuit) or hardens (= cake). But what nobody seems to question (and what probably only Alex Allan as a C and E neophyte in the 70s knows) was why cakes are deemed worthy of a zero rate and the evil biscuit attracts the full whack....
The tax purist would argue that the right answer (and how many times did we dream of this in the Chancellor's Private Office) would be a single uniform VAT rate across the whole economy. But the advent of the EU minimum standard rate of 15% in 1992 probably put paid to that (the fiscally neutral equivalent used to be about 12%).
But now that food policy is back on the agenda -- alongside increasing concerns about the expanding national waistline - there might be a case for looking again at some of the oddities of the VAT treatment of food. So given that a uniform move to 17.5% looks a courageous Chancellorial move too far, it might be a start to move cakes to the other side of the borderline - a healthy cake is pretty much of an oxymoron.
Having started there, and notwithstanding Delia's latest attempts in "How to cheat" to convince us that processed is best - or at least OK - how about 17.5% on all processed food - and keep the zero rate just for that nice fresh stuff - whether from Kent or Kenya. Or 17.5% on anything that has red or amber on a food label - which owed probably amount to much the same thing. Come on Jamie -- your next campaign?
Of course I realise that there will be scope for more arguments. Is UHT milk processed or not? what about those innocent smoothies (fruit juices and blended fruit drinks like smoothies are now at 17.5% alongside Coke and Sunny Delight -- HMRC believes food - however rich in e numbers - is an essential of life but beverages aren't)? what about the frozen peas so beloved of Gordon Ramsay and our top chefs? Anyone for Birds Eye v HMRC?
Still, a serious look at the way we tax food seems about 36 years overdue - and that is before we start thinking up new ideas like the famed but stillborn PMSU fat tax. But once we have started out making more sense of VAT we can start looking at what 21st century sins we want to target with excise duties.
Friday 11 April 2008
Overdelivered?
There is a saying about being careful about what you wish for which seems to apply rather aptly to current developments in the housing market. Reducing house prices has been an objective of policy for some time - and one that seems to be about to be delivered well ahead of schedule. A few braver commentators are venturing to say that a house price correction may not be the end of the world, may indeed be rather overdue and could be good news for first time buyers - and flicking through the property brochure at the breakfast table this morning there seemed rather a lot of scope for corrective adjustment. But am not sure that the housing market is flashing green as a success in performance reports at the moment.
Which is a shame - because a saner attitude to housing - where prices related more to actual consumption of housing services and less to prospective untaxed capital gains - would reduce the strange and pernicious housing bias of our economy. It would stop people being driven into massive overextension to buy - because renting was a "waste" - and stop mortgage lenders being tempted into lending to doubtful risks. It would stop people like me from feeling foolish for not being overhoused - and not borrowing to ensure I was - and missing out on the chance to stack up even more unproductive equity.
But even though anyone who is interested in housing as housing can be pretty sanguine about general house price movements, the fact that we ask housing to play to many roles - as investment portfolio, as future pension, as collateral for other borrowing, as a general source of feeling "rich" means that when the housing market starts to droop, the rest of the economy heads lemming like for the cliff.
Which always made reducing house prices an interesting policy objective - but one only to be achieved by stealth over years of gradual erosion relative to rising incomes - not by a step change in delivery of the sort we are witnessing now. And what would be interesting is whether this downturn changes attitudes to housing - or whether after a couple of slightly hairy years of market dislocation - with rising repossessions, thin markets as sellers strike, and new build dries up - we return to the same old spiral as happened last time round. Or will anyone fight the next election on policies explicitly designed to restrain demand as well as increase supply?
Which is a shame - because a saner attitude to housing - where prices related more to actual consumption of housing services and less to prospective untaxed capital gains - would reduce the strange and pernicious housing bias of our economy. It would stop people being driven into massive overextension to buy - because renting was a "waste" - and stop mortgage lenders being tempted into lending to doubtful risks. It would stop people like me from feeling foolish for not being overhoused - and not borrowing to ensure I was - and missing out on the chance to stack up even more unproductive equity.
But even though anyone who is interested in housing as housing can be pretty sanguine about general house price movements, the fact that we ask housing to play to many roles - as investment portfolio, as future pension, as collateral for other borrowing, as a general source of feeling "rich" means that when the housing market starts to droop, the rest of the economy heads lemming like for the cliff.
Which always made reducing house prices an interesting policy objective - but one only to be achieved by stealth over years of gradual erosion relative to rising incomes - not by a step change in delivery of the sort we are witnessing now. And what would be interesting is whether this downturn changes attitudes to housing - or whether after a couple of slightly hairy years of market dislocation - with rising repossessions, thin markets as sellers strike, and new build dries up - we return to the same old spiral as happened last time round. Or will anyone fight the next election on policies explicitly designed to restrain demand as well as increase supply?
Monday 7 April 2008
Brain numb
and that is after only three and a half days back at work... how is it that being back in the office seems to have deleted all interesting thoughts from my head -- well actually just all thoughts full stop.
But the exciting stuff -- since may have to wait until a bit later to get back into proper blog mode - is that I managed the assault on the north face of my flat - got up in two minutes and even managed a rather scary attempt to plant new maple tree (a present from Civil Service Live! - not sure whether there is an exclamation mark but I feel there should be) on my roof terrace. And, since coming down is even harder than going up, the very good news is that I was no longer there when the snow came down.
Didn't stick around in NHG for the chance to mug Konnie Huq or Tim Henman outside my door or be roughed up by spooky Chinese bouncers in what looked like UN blue. Decided to take refuge in Chichester. But the major development is exponential growth in walking ability. Can now move around my mother's house without crutches (key thing about here is that there is a lot of soft stuff to fall on).
So will continue reduced hours schedule. Have discovered work is quite tiring -- not quite worked out yet why. But sort of good to be back and have more to worry about than whether Federer will ever win another tennis tournament or how the Indians managed to get bowled out before lunch for 76 or whether Angela Lansbury will solve yet another death in Cabot Cove which makes Morse's Oxford or the killing fields of Midsomer look safe(though the former both interesting questions in their own way -- and quite interesting to wonder why Serbia has two of the top three women - while they had to play under bombing raids - and the top British woman is ranked 122.... but then that moves onto the vexed Britishness question of whether the new Tebbit test is to support Andy Murray at tennis when I think he is a boring brat and, as he falls down the rankings, clearly Scottish.)
Am doing the blog on my lunch break (that is in case the thought police are on to me at the moment -- if i were at work I would be sipping a low fat cap in the atrium now). So its back to the grindstone and then the gym where am now using a range of fancy new machines on the lowest imaginable settings.
But the exciting stuff -- since may have to wait until a bit later to get back into proper blog mode - is that I managed the assault on the north face of my flat - got up in two minutes and even managed a rather scary attempt to plant new maple tree (a present from Civil Service Live! - not sure whether there is an exclamation mark but I feel there should be) on my roof terrace. And, since coming down is even harder than going up, the very good news is that I was no longer there when the snow came down.
Didn't stick around in NHG for the chance to mug Konnie Huq or Tim Henman outside my door or be roughed up by spooky Chinese bouncers in what looked like UN blue. Decided to take refuge in Chichester. But the major development is exponential growth in walking ability. Can now move around my mother's house without crutches (key thing about here is that there is a lot of soft stuff to fall on).
So will continue reduced hours schedule. Have discovered work is quite tiring -- not quite worked out yet why. But sort of good to be back and have more to worry about than whether Federer will ever win another tennis tournament or how the Indians managed to get bowled out before lunch for 76 or whether Angela Lansbury will solve yet another death in Cabot Cove which makes Morse's Oxford or the killing fields of Midsomer look safe(though the former both interesting questions in their own way -- and quite interesting to wonder why Serbia has two of the top three women - while they had to play under bombing raids - and the top British woman is ranked 122.... but then that moves onto the vexed Britishness question of whether the new Tebbit test is to support Andy Murray at tennis when I think he is a boring brat and, as he falls down the rankings, clearly Scottish.)
Am doing the blog on my lunch break (that is in case the thought police are on to me at the moment -- if i were at work I would be sipping a low fat cap in the atrium now). So its back to the grindstone and then the gym where am now using a range of fancy new machines on the lowest imaginable settings.
Monday 31 March 2008
Rumsfeld woz right?
well no, not about everything.... much of today's carnage in Iraq seems to fall into the eminently predictable. But having just read "The Black Swan" there might be rather more in the much mocked "unknown unknowns" - apparently a key part US DOD thinking rather than an example of another US politician misspeaking - than we normally give credit for.
The main message of the Black Swan is that turkeys would quite rationally vote for Christmas. After all, the average turkey day (subject to animal welfare standards) is pretty good - so a rationally forecasting turkey, basing predictions on past experience would quite reasonably think that December would be pretty much like November (assuming no turkey email with the US). But its the catastrophic last day which changes everything. So the message of the book is that unless we want to be suckers like the poor old turkey, we need to be much more aware that - to quote DR again - "stuff happens" - and that is all too often the stuff that renders all our forecasts meaningless and changes the course of history (and also may account for who you marry, and the very fact you exist at all - an occurrence with a very low probability.).
So apart from a lot of bile against social scientists and economists of all sorts, what are the useful lessons from assuming we know less about the future than we think (a case the book makes quite convincingly). The first message is to elevate preparedness over predictive capacity - predictive capacity is overdependent on normal distributions and assume that the future is like the past- and breaks down when it isn't. The second is to recognise that Black Swans can be good as well as bad -- so minimise exposure to bad Black Swans - and give yourself every opportunity to benefit from positive black swans - by for example taking chances to meet new people; hear new ideas, and put a small amount of money - money you are prepared to lose - invested in risky ventures with low downside but big upside potential.
The third recommendation is much more relevant for policy-making - that rather than overinvest in theoretical models trying to predict the world, adopt a more venture capital approach to policy-making. Don't assume you know what works in advance - better to try lots of things and then scale up the ideas that work and kill off those that don't. Substitute experience-based policy making for "evidence-based policy making". This accords with many of the prescriptions around for improving aid policy. Less Jeffrey Sachs and more Jeff Bezos.
The only problem is that a venture capital approach implies a number of failures - indeed that the majority of ideas might fail (and it also assumes we can understand and replicate the ideas that work) - and finding the Black Swan may not be enough to substitute for a bunch of dying white swans littering the street. But not clear that taxpayers or Ministers would be pleased to see that.
This is likely to be the last blog for a bit - finally back to work and to stay with a friend whose broadband doesn't work. Back to the dark ages. But latest news from the physio today is that am still on track - more, harder exercises and have just discovered I have been underutlizing the gym. I just need to make sure that Defra doesn't impede recovery - I can treat my personal "renewal" as a metaphor for the department.
The main message of the Black Swan is that turkeys would quite rationally vote for Christmas. After all, the average turkey day (subject to animal welfare standards) is pretty good - so a rationally forecasting turkey, basing predictions on past experience would quite reasonably think that December would be pretty much like November (assuming no turkey email with the US). But its the catastrophic last day which changes everything. So the message of the book is that unless we want to be suckers like the poor old turkey, we need to be much more aware that - to quote DR again - "stuff happens" - and that is all too often the stuff that renders all our forecasts meaningless and changes the course of history (and also may account for who you marry, and the very fact you exist at all - an occurrence with a very low probability.).
So apart from a lot of bile against social scientists and economists of all sorts, what are the useful lessons from assuming we know less about the future than we think (a case the book makes quite convincingly). The first message is to elevate preparedness over predictive capacity - predictive capacity is overdependent on normal distributions and assume that the future is like the past- and breaks down when it isn't. The second is to recognise that Black Swans can be good as well as bad -- so minimise exposure to bad Black Swans - and give yourself every opportunity to benefit from positive black swans - by for example taking chances to meet new people; hear new ideas, and put a small amount of money - money you are prepared to lose - invested in risky ventures with low downside but big upside potential.
The third recommendation is much more relevant for policy-making - that rather than overinvest in theoretical models trying to predict the world, adopt a more venture capital approach to policy-making. Don't assume you know what works in advance - better to try lots of things and then scale up the ideas that work and kill off those that don't. Substitute experience-based policy making for "evidence-based policy making". This accords with many of the prescriptions around for improving aid policy. Less Jeffrey Sachs and more Jeff Bezos.
The only problem is that a venture capital approach implies a number of failures - indeed that the majority of ideas might fail (and it also assumes we can understand and replicate the ideas that work) - and finding the Black Swan may not be enough to substitute for a bunch of dying white swans littering the street. But not clear that taxpayers or Ministers would be pleased to see that.
This is likely to be the last blog for a bit - finally back to work and to stay with a friend whose broadband doesn't work. Back to the dark ages. But latest news from the physio today is that am still on track - more, harder exercises and have just discovered I have been underutlizing the gym. I just need to make sure that Defra doesn't impede recovery - I can treat my personal "renewal" as a metaphor for the department.
Saturday 29 March 2008
A small step for womankind
Not the best of weeks for progress -- was supposed to do a couple of days at work but managed to catch flu from the physio (he in turn blames some 85 year old for giving it to him) - confirmation of general thesis that seeing medical professionals is bad for health. So no swimming, only a couple of gym visits which interestingly had a six week waiting list for half-price medical referrals - I think we need a new target on that.
But, despite all that, two minor triumphs today - first, I managed to get myself into the two new suits I bought for work just before my hip gave out - had been worried that two months of custard tarts and no cycling and still bulging hip would have meant I needed the excellent Mary to let the seams out and, second, I managed to walk five steps across my bedroom and back without a "walking aid". Not quite up for the marathon in two weeks time, but on schedule for the 10k at next year's Chichester triathlon (veteran's category).
So its back to work next Tuesday - or is that just an April fool?
But, despite all that, two minor triumphs today - first, I managed to get myself into the two new suits I bought for work just before my hip gave out - had been worried that two months of custard tarts and no cycling and still bulging hip would have meant I needed the excellent Mary to let the seams out and, second, I managed to walk five steps across my bedroom and back without a "walking aid". Not quite up for the marathon in two weeks time, but on schedule for the 10k at next year's Chichester triathlon (veteran's category).
So its back to work next Tuesday - or is that just an April fool?
Thursday 27 March 2008
Expensive failures
I don't think I have admitted to date that I am one of the happy crew aka a Northern Rock shareholder. I don't think I paid anything for them, have no clue how to trade shares, but can worry myself with a nominal loss of about £18k over the past year.
So it was with a degree of personal interest that I read the reports of the FSA's internal audit on the supervisory failures around Northern Rock tinged with an added degree of personal interest as one of the former FSA employees who left with what appeared to be quite a big pay-off was a university contemporary of mine. Which all provokes a variety of thoughts.
First is that we need to get away from the culture of big-time rewards for failure in the public sector. People in senior jobs who screw up need to be held to account for that and need to expect to leave without a pay-off which would keep a hospital ward open for a year. If this means we need to pay people more to get them to do the jobs in the first place, so be it -- but I can't believe that the implicit pay-off for failure is a salient consideration in salary discussions (I may be wrong). But huge handouts for getting things spectacularly wrong fail the Dog and Duck test. We should establish a presumption of no pay out - and let an Employment Tribunal decide on the merits afterwards whether that is fair - that would prevent cosy deals within organisations against the public interest and ensure a missing degree of transparency.
Of course, one of the usual protections - not available in the FSA - is Ministerial accountability. And there is any interesting distinction to be drawn on the source of failure - the most spectacular policy failure I was ever involved in was the community charge - though looks cheap compared to the potential contingent liability on NR even at 2008 prices - but whole books have been written on who was to blame for what there - but that was more a failure of policy assumption rather than implementation. People in the FSA could I assume claim that the initial set up and split of responsibilities between the Bank and the FSA was wrong - but they joined the FSA either as those decisions were being made and if they might have thought more about whether the institutional arrangements were right if they felt they might be personally at risk if they failed. It could concentrate the mind wonderfully.
But I don't want the private sector to get away with it either. One of the most galling stories - be it Northern Rock, be it Enron (not sure when NR the movie comes out - but the Enron movie "The Smartest Guys in the Room" is highly recommended for an evening in) is of senior management selling shares at the top of the market while assuring muggins investors that all is well or encouraging staff to put more of their money into the company. So my second rule is that no senior executive should be allowed to deal in company shares until three years after they leave - so they really do have an interest in long(er) term shareholder value. And the ABI and other investors who have done so much to look at executive remuneration need to exercise their muscle over the price of failure.
So in the week that Alan Sugar has come back to our TV screens, it would be good to see more people who fail leaving with a briefcase in a taxi to the words "You're fired" - without passing go and collecting a big brown envelope.
So it was with a degree of personal interest that I read the reports of the FSA's internal audit on the supervisory failures around Northern Rock tinged with an added degree of personal interest as one of the former FSA employees who left with what appeared to be quite a big pay-off was a university contemporary of mine. Which all provokes a variety of thoughts.
First is that we need to get away from the culture of big-time rewards for failure in the public sector. People in senior jobs who screw up need to be held to account for that and need to expect to leave without a pay-off which would keep a hospital ward open for a year. If this means we need to pay people more to get them to do the jobs in the first place, so be it -- but I can't believe that the implicit pay-off for failure is a salient consideration in salary discussions (I may be wrong). But huge handouts for getting things spectacularly wrong fail the Dog and Duck test. We should establish a presumption of no pay out - and let an Employment Tribunal decide on the merits afterwards whether that is fair - that would prevent cosy deals within organisations against the public interest and ensure a missing degree of transparency.
Of course, one of the usual protections - not available in the FSA - is Ministerial accountability. And there is any interesting distinction to be drawn on the source of failure - the most spectacular policy failure I was ever involved in was the community charge - though looks cheap compared to the potential contingent liability on NR even at 2008 prices - but whole books have been written on who was to blame for what there - but that was more a failure of policy assumption rather than implementation. People in the FSA could I assume claim that the initial set up and split of responsibilities between the Bank and the FSA was wrong - but they joined the FSA either as those decisions were being made and if they might have thought more about whether the institutional arrangements were right if they felt they might be personally at risk if they failed. It could concentrate the mind wonderfully.
But I don't want the private sector to get away with it either. One of the most galling stories - be it Northern Rock, be it Enron (not sure when NR the movie comes out - but the Enron movie "The Smartest Guys in the Room" is highly recommended for an evening in) is of senior management selling shares at the top of the market while assuring muggins investors that all is well or encouraging staff to put more of their money into the company. So my second rule is that no senior executive should be allowed to deal in company shares until three years after they leave - so they really do have an interest in long(er) term shareholder value. And the ABI and other investors who have done so much to look at executive remuneration need to exercise their muscle over the price of failure.
So in the week that Alan Sugar has come back to our TV screens, it would be good to see more people who fail leaving with a briefcase in a taxi to the words "You're fired" - without passing go and collecting a big brown envelope.
Tuesday 25 March 2008
Happy of Himalayas
Doesn't quite have the ring of Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells, but news at the weekend that the good people of Bhutan are about to enjoy democracy for the first time. The ruler of Bhutan is famous and revered in many quarters for attempting to measure Gross National Happiness as opposed to simply relying on GDP. So is his imposition of democracy (itself a rather unusual development) going to make his people happier?
Not according to Professor Robert Lane if you read his book "Loss of happiness in market democracies". According to Professor Lane democratic rights are a bit of a bore and a chore and do nothing special for our happiness (though the good news for the Bhutanese is that happy people tend to have better democracies). Indeed Professor Lane's thesis is that people in advanced economies don't know what is good for them, so an effective democratic system has failure built-in. The problem is that people are seduced by the economistic fallacy (more money is what you want) when, in a developed economy, what people really really want is more companionship and to value their children more (and not just by buying them bigger and better computers for their bedroom). Or at least that is what he thinks Americans should want and what would reverse the massive rise in depression.
The Good news for economics is that he thinks economics does get it right for most of the world's population and for most of humanity's time on earth -- when people are poor the equation of being better off and happiness works. Its just when you get to that pesky bend in the curve and diminishing returns set in -- but people don't realise it.
Not that Professor Lane thinks there is much governments can do - promote job security and make it easier for people to have time for companionship - and perhaps pay more attention to moves that break up communities. And not watch TV or play on the computer.
But for a book that purports to be about happiness, Prof L has managed to produce one of the most turgid and pompous tomes I have read. A danger of thinking that something on Amazon looks interestingf..Just when I thought all American professors could be relied on to convey knowledge and insights in the style of Paul Merton or Stephen Fry comes along someone with the stylistic flair of an HMRC press release (actually they are usually livelier). So don;t bother with the book and do something companionable - with person or pet - instead.
Not according to Professor Robert Lane if you read his book "Loss of happiness in market democracies". According to Professor Lane democratic rights are a bit of a bore and a chore and do nothing special for our happiness (though the good news for the Bhutanese is that happy people tend to have better democracies). Indeed Professor Lane's thesis is that people in advanced economies don't know what is good for them, so an effective democratic system has failure built-in. The problem is that people are seduced by the economistic fallacy (more money is what you want) when, in a developed economy, what people really really want is more companionship and to value their children more (and not just by buying them bigger and better computers for their bedroom). Or at least that is what he thinks Americans should want and what would reverse the massive rise in depression.
The Good news for economics is that he thinks economics does get it right for most of the world's population and for most of humanity's time on earth -- when people are poor the equation of being better off and happiness works. Its just when you get to that pesky bend in the curve and diminishing returns set in -- but people don't realise it.
Not that Professor Lane thinks there is much governments can do - promote job security and make it easier for people to have time for companionship - and perhaps pay more attention to moves that break up communities. And not watch TV or play on the computer.
But for a book that purports to be about happiness, Prof L has managed to produce one of the most turgid and pompous tomes I have read. A danger of thinking that something on Amazon looks interestingf..Just when I thought all American professors could be relied on to convey knowledge and insights in the style of Paul Merton or Stephen Fry comes along someone with the stylistic flair of an HMRC press release (actually they are usually livelier). So don;t bother with the book and do something companionable - with person or pet - instead.
Monday 24 March 2008
Taking dictation
My vote in a general election has never counted for anything (though if today's AV proposals being floated in the press come to pass that may change) so this can all be treated as entirely hypothetical - but if my vote did count this weekend's rumpus over conscience might cause me to rethink how I vote.
In a party ridden Parliamentary democracy I have always assumed that the dominant issue in how I vote is which party I think would make the less bad government. I can't claim that is always how I vote as last time I discovered in the polling booth (one consequence in living in a one-party fiefdom is you don't get much election literature as all the parties concentrate on those voters lucky enough to live in marginals) that one of the candidates was someone I loathed at university so I had to rethink with pencil in hand... But generally I pay little attention to the personal views and still less to the religious affiliations of the candidates. And as a general thesis I want MPs who who aren't just grade A lobby fodder -- and indeed when I was out of government I was part of a Hansard Society commission that looked at ways of strengthening the capacity of MPs to hold the executive to account.
But the recent furore over embryo research causes me to rethink. If there are some MPs who on some issues simply take dictation from their church then I think I need to know that they are going to do that before I vote - or don't - for them. I don't mind voting for an MP who rebels over Post Office or local A and E closures (though would regard them as pretty hypocritical if they don't have a view on how to finance that) or maybe even on Europe if they came clean on that in advance - but those are issues where there is a party line to vote for. On "ethical" issues where there is a free vote there is no party line for me to choose - and therefore I am lumbered with being represented by the personal views of my MP however alien they are to me -- and that is even more difficult to accept if those views are not susceptible to any sort of logical reasoning - and ones informed by deeply and genuinely held religious faith are hardly likely to be.
But at the same time, I think we have benefited from depoliticising moral issues and avoiding the so-called culture wars and values voting that has poisoned US politics for so long. And making some issues subject to free votes has been part of that. It may be that this is an area where we have to accept that our elected representatives are not really fit for purpose and opt instead for farming out the issue to a more technocratic organisation informed by a more genuinely representative citizen's jury and some proper deliberation.
Until then, I will just have to pay a bit more attention to whom I am voting for - well I would if it was likely to make one jot of difference.
In a party ridden Parliamentary democracy I have always assumed that the dominant issue in how I vote is which party I think would make the less bad government. I can't claim that is always how I vote as last time I discovered in the polling booth (one consequence in living in a one-party fiefdom is you don't get much election literature as all the parties concentrate on those voters lucky enough to live in marginals) that one of the candidates was someone I loathed at university so I had to rethink with pencil in hand... But generally I pay little attention to the personal views and still less to the religious affiliations of the candidates. And as a general thesis I want MPs who who aren't just grade A lobby fodder -- and indeed when I was out of government I was part of a Hansard Society commission that looked at ways of strengthening the capacity of MPs to hold the executive to account.
But the recent furore over embryo research causes me to rethink. If there are some MPs who on some issues simply take dictation from their church then I think I need to know that they are going to do that before I vote - or don't - for them. I don't mind voting for an MP who rebels over Post Office or local A and E closures (though would regard them as pretty hypocritical if they don't have a view on how to finance that) or maybe even on Europe if they came clean on that in advance - but those are issues where there is a party line to vote for. On "ethical" issues where there is a free vote there is no party line for me to choose - and therefore I am lumbered with being represented by the personal views of my MP however alien they are to me -- and that is even more difficult to accept if those views are not susceptible to any sort of logical reasoning - and ones informed by deeply and genuinely held religious faith are hardly likely to be.
But at the same time, I think we have benefited from depoliticising moral issues and avoiding the so-called culture wars and values voting that has poisoned US politics for so long. And making some issues subject to free votes has been part of that. It may be that this is an area where we have to accept that our elected representatives are not really fit for purpose and opt instead for farming out the issue to a more technocratic organisation informed by a more genuinely representative citizen's jury and some proper deliberation.
Until then, I will just have to pay a bit more attention to whom I am voting for - well I would if it was likely to make one jot of difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)