Sunday, 31 May 2009
Been a few days
Monday, 25 May 2009
Angry
New England Bank Holiday NOISEFEST
Friday, 22 May 2009
Triple A
Standard and Poor have "considered dropping the UK's credit rating below AAA (our first negative rating for 30 odd years). They haven't done it though. They've jsut suggested there's a one in three chance that the next time they look at us, they might have too. And the two other rating agencies haven't even gone that far. Man, what do we have to do to get those guys to weigh up our massive debt, our lack of natural resources, our lack of any kind of serious industry, our overpopulation in relation to available land, our declining skills and our predominant lack of speakers of a second language and say "that really does not make a good basis for investment, people. What acronym do we usually give when we want to suggest investors would be better off putting cash under the mattress?".
Actually they can rate us with a series of A's if they like, either 2 or 3. They just need to indicate by that that they mean we're on the hard shoulder, the bonnet is up, we're looking puzzled, some steam is coming out, the kids are restless and we're waiting for some one to tow us to a convenient location before we're scrapped (or given us for "scrappage" as whatever department is now in charge of Transport likes to call it, the philistines). S&P triple A rated the very investment instruments that caused the credit crunch in the first place. They are craven and possibly willfully ignorant. The rating they give is effectively meaningless since people are still going to buy our cheap bonds. Luckily we have a government who use sophistry to turn our burgeoning national debt into an actual triumph of attracting inward investment! Genius.
Thursday, 21 May 2009
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
Schools in again
Sunday, 17 May 2009
Vote
Friday, 15 May 2009
Interesting developments
Slightly vindicated also in Alexander Chancellor taking Stephen Fry to task. Not how I would have put it, but Fry certainly is an unlikely champion for MP's and they don't have many friends left. To be fair though, I don't think Fry was doing anything other than pointing out the potential for journalists hypocrisy and perhaps taking a John 8:7 viewpoint. I'm sure if he met Miss Brooke (maybe he has, he famously knows everyone who is anyone), he'd find it quite a difficult view to maintain in the face of a fiercely determined and upright (and also rather pretty) young woman. And as more and more is revealed by the Telegraph (which is presenting the story in the manner of a burlesque artiste; one wonders whether there is anything really saucy left to be shown before the lights go out), he might also regret making the point about the public interest being "bourgeoise". As Paul Weller once sang, the public gets what the public wants, and "national treasure" status may not be a permanent award, and the appearance of arrogance or snobbery would be a good enough reason to withdraw it.
Another bible verse brought to mind is Romans 3:23 when reading James Macintyre in the New Statesman who names only four MP's that can have a clear conscience out the 650. I'm happy to name one of them as Ed Milliband. As the Climate Change Secetary was appearing at Old Billingsgate for the most recent Prince of Wales May Day Summit, he disembarked from a snazzy silver Merc and went into the street entrance at the same time as me. I think I may have been mistaken for one of his entourage as I got into the evnt with barely any security checks. I noted that there was a massive queue on the riverside public entrance. Another non-transgressor is Hilary Benn (son of Tony), who is environment secretary. Could it be that having the brief of concern for the future of the planet (one of the many things that Fry rightly pointed out MP's should be getting on with) is allied to a sense of probity in other areas. Maybe not in my case, but it is an interesting coincidence. Hilary's old man managed to make Paxman wriggle in his seat on Newsnight the other night, almost getting to the point of "doing a Foulkes" and asking the famed BBC public servant, vicious attack dog and University Challenge host how much he earned.
Thursday, 14 May 2009
Coke
Cash
The furore presently engulfing Westminster over dodgy expense claims might seem bourgoise, but honestly if the majority of people are genuinely angry about something, that's not tyranny, it's democracy and we are seeing a response - knee jerk and piecemeal and without great chagrin, but a response nonetheless. Of course it is very hard to sign a cheque whilst simultaneously wringing your hands. Actually it's quite odd to see chequebooks rematerialising in this electronic payment era. There's something quite bourgoise itself about writing out a cheque for tradespersons and sundries. Did MP's have to fumble around in a dresser drawer before emerging with a folded inkstained tattered chequebook? Did the cheques have the address of the old defunct branch they joined when they were a student, on the promise of a £1,000 overdraft, the gift of a plastic pig moneybox and a 25% railcard discount; the branch that is now a winebar?
One good thing for bankers is that MP's are fielding more flak. They can get back to the markets. And it seems that some of the stimulae the government and the Bank of England engineered are beginning to work. Unemployment is going up but that always lags the other indicators in a recession. But there were 30,000 mortgage approvals last month. that's a bit more like it.
A friend of mine in Australia just busted his gigabeat. That's an MP3 player - or iPod as they are now known. In the way that we all use Hoover as a verb, so most owners of non-Apple MP3 players call them iPods to save having to explain why they bought an iRiver or a Creative Zen. It's a conversation worth avoiding, as Saab owners will know. We might value eccentricity collectively but individually an eccentric is a prophet without honour in England. Anyway, he thought about paying $500 for an iPod touch and that sounded like a lot. Unlike ex-pats, I never know rates of exchange from one day to the next (although I keep an eye on the CAN$ because Mum and Dad live there and I might one day want to visit again). I responded:
If you used it for games and movies it's worth it apparently. If you just want it for music, maybe not worth $500. But then at current rates of exchange AUS$500 is worth about a million pounds. And if I had a million pounds I'd buy two ipod touches and rub them together to make fire so I can heat up some carrots I scavenged growing wild in a layby.
My mate Glen found this quite funny only because every other time we have had a conversation about how much things cost in our respective corners of the world, I have made great play out of the plastic monopoly money they use. For instance, he should be checking to see if it has "Hamleys Bank of Toytown" on it or if the illustration appears to show that the first Governor of ANB was actually Big Ears from the Enid Blyton books. Obviously hilarity ensues.
I'll try not to obsess about money too much (although we'll find out if there will be any performance bonuses in the next day or so; with pay having been frozen and standard bonuses abolished, this is a blue letter day). Although I keep saying the money is not the important factor in the MP Expense Scandal, the fact that they can nonchalantly write cheques for tens of thousands of pounds is indicative of the relative level of remuneration, and the respective wealth, of members of parliament. Did they hive off the expenses received into a separate account in anticipation of the day when they'd be called to pay it back? Surely not. No, these are people who can pay the Inland Revenue the equivalent of an entire years salary for someone on the minimum wage, as soon as they are asked to do so by their chief whip. When I got stung by the Inland Revenue it was because I misread the self assessment form. Trying to be honest, I declared things I had already been taxed once for. The Tax Office cared very little about that (as it happens I should never have been on self-assessment in the first place). The forms were very complicated, and my sarky letter to them about the subject definitely didn't smooth things along. But when a tax bill dropped onto the mat for a couple of grand, I nearly cacked my knickers, cried and punched something hard, all in one smooth (fluid) motion. It was terrifying. I had no option but to protest because I have rarely if ever seen more than £1,000 credit and those occasions were when I took out a personal loan. Where would I produce that kind of lolly except by borrowing it? Maybe that's what MP's are doing. In which case ,I'd like to be the bank manager who gets to approve that one. I'd ask them first what they think about bankers. Do they think bankers are really responsible for the mess everyone is in? I'd watch their face carefully, with my Mont Blanc fountain pen poised delicately above the approval form. Actually that's old fashioned. The pleasure of making bank customers squirm has been all but eradicated. Now bank clerks only joy is to frustrate people by making them memorise ten different sixteen digit numbers for their online bank account, knowing that if they can't bank online, they probably can't bank at all (try looking for a member of staff in your local bank branch. Where are they all hiding?).
I had reason to rue the fact that the UK does not have plastic funny money the other day. I went into my local corner shop to get a four pack of Kronenbourg (to accompany the cricket highlights) and be told my money was no good. The reason the rather bored Asian shop assistant maintained was that it was a fake fiver. I explained that it had just been washed in my jeans and that accounted for the unusual texture and the appearances of little yellow blotchess on the Queens face watermark, but he would not believe me. I can see how racial tensions boil over in situations like this. I was fuming (lager lust). Only afterwards I realised that small retailers don't turn away good money for no reason (actually many small shopkeepers practically rip a note out of your hand when you pay for something these days such is the need for cash), so he had probably been passed false notes recently and lost out. Bad luck that. I also thought about Michael Moore's contention that one always ought to be more frightened by a white man than by any other colour man because the chances are he's done you more harm (and can do you even more harm) than anyone else on the planet; not to single out our predominantly male, white, middle-class, independently wealthy, two-house-owning members of parliament as a example, obviously...
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
Day One
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
Paying it back is just the start
It seems that if Lord Foulkes http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8045371.stm
and Stephen Fry http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8045040.stm are one one side of an argument, as my friend Stu indicated to me they were today, it's quite hard to take the opposite viewpoint. But personally I have to stick to my guns. The row over compensation claims by MP's is not a storm in a teacup. The first point to make to Lord Foulkes is that £92,000 is not twice £64,000. No wonder they can't cope with expenses claims, if that's the level of numeracy. But actually MP's know perfectly well how to add up; as repeated calculating behaviour has shown.
When Stu expressed to me his sympathy with Foulkes, I felt compelled to respond because I am genuinely angry about this. And it is not personal either. I'm not the man without sin casting the first stone. The Telegraph revelations were hidden, deliberately, from public scrutiny. I told Stu:
"This is the single most important breach of trust (and there have been many) in my living memory and it is multi-party, root and branch corruption. It's not the amounts that matter. It's trusted public servants on the fiddle. They made the rules they're now blaming. No one will stand up and say, "yes I played the system". Only four MP's did not make an expense claim on their second home. They are the only ones who should be re-elected when this parliament dissolves (and I agree with Lord Naseby, it ought to dissolve now).
AND they tried to cover it up. In this so called freedom of information age, it took a mole to air their soiled laundry in public (whoever leaked this should get a knighthood, but unfortunately politicians choose who gets those). We used to throw out parliaments for less. This is "Rotten Borough II" - - subtitled just when you thought it was safe to start expecting probity from public officials. And there are no Levellers now to lay siege to them, because the tabloids have gone all "Katie and Peter". Maybe all those numbers and all that corruption weren't as good a story (which tells you all you need to know about what an intellectually moribund apathetic celebutard culture this country now promotes).
Or maybe journalists are also on the take and were scared that MP's would flag up a few of those costly lunches. But why should that be? Journalists have commercial employers and a commercial employer can choose to can your ass for stuff like that. Some employers search employees bags, or have CCTV inside offices, or ping you on dodgy emails. Most tell you how to dress and almost all censor what you can say, and generally run your life like they own it. But who governs MP's? They made the very rules they have bent; rules that would never make it past the first draft of a company policy for A&M Nitwit Window Cleaning Company Ltd, let alone the mother of all parliaments. Examine those claims, tell me they don't stick in your craw - moat cleaning, claiming Tesco staff discounts, switching your second home three times in a year and a half just to get repairs done, claiming that the taxpayer fund undersoil heating for your tennis court?
If it was an excuse that we're all of us on the take, and that they're merely reflecting society, well how is that qualifying them to lead us or direct us? And if so, they can drop the honorific Right Honourable from the parliamentary form of address right now, and become plain old Dave Cameron, Margret Moran, Stuart Jackson (who I voted for) and Gordon Brown from now on. And even if that were an excuse, which it isn't, I don't swear an oath to do my job and they do. I sign a contract of employment and I know exactly what might happen if I breach the terms. They have a contract of trust with every British citizen, and all but four of them breached it, and had barely a qualm about it, and are apparently most annoyed because they got found out. The kind of blustering fuffle they have been spluttering, from Michael Martin downwards, hardly constitutes the reasoned dialectic the House is supposed to be famous for, either. Any decent magistrate would shut them up on a witness stand for wasting the courts time.
I commute to London daily for my job, which pays a damn sight less than a backbenchers job. I don't claim a second home at tax payers expense or get taxpayers to do up my other house for free, whilst I reside in a posh London flat. I get up in the morning early enough to get tow rok on time and stay on late enough to get my job done. I sometimes stay on without overtime beyond that; out of a consienctious desire to do my job properly. Contrast that with the times I get home, turn on the telly and see a mostly empty commons debating chamber talking nonsense and achieving eff all. And with the times I have written to ministers and received scant or pat responses (Stuart Jackson excepted, to be fair to him). I don't have my hand in the till at work and nor would I ever condone it from a colleague, however small the amount. Theft is theft, and theft is literally taking something to which you are not entitled. I take my salary and this year I took a pay freeze and my basic bonus was frozen (and at a time when MP's voted themselves a payrise, something most of hard working Britain is unable to do). I am completely comfortable with that, despite the inflation lies I'm told (we can all see how many things have gone up), because I know that it means my colleagues won't lose their jobs. I also claim only the expenses I believe that the firm should meet, not spurious ones. I expect - actually, I demand - that a member of parliament who I, or my fellow citizens, elects meets the same standard. No more - who could ask for that in this day and age - but certainly no less".
Stu then responded with the point made by Stephen Fry (bless him and his luvvie bretheren. If this crisis presages a dissolution, Labour will not even crawl back in to power) that MP's have more important things to deal with than this. I was outraged - not Stu's fault, but this is an even bigger nerve - the sciatic to my previously tweaked median.
"If Stephen Fry thinks there are more important things for them to do than sort this mess out (and can I just say they are making a right hash of all of those things by the way), and he doesn't seriously believe our democracy hangs by a thread, how does he know this bunch of self serving bastards will work for the things he thinks ARE important? They can be bought and sold. We presumed this, but never voiced it until now because it was always just one individual and not a quorum as it now is. Now we know they will not need olive oil and leather pants before grappling with their consciences, because they vanquished ithem years ago. They remind me of children who throw stones through already broken windows; absolved of the need to question their own participation by the throng. They grab a loophole with both hands a swing from it, whilst mooning the general public. They lie and cheat and finagle. They have more fiddlers than a missing symphony orchestra getting pissed in O'Neils. They have failed their duty, and been caught out, and we need to elect new ones, not keep this shabby lot. I wouldn't keep an incompetent employee just because they are honest. But I certainly wouldn't permit a dishonest employee to continue, no matter how effective they are.
And if they can't sort out a simple thing like how to make a rule for themselves that disallows them the opportunity to fleece the tax payer for personal gain, they cannot have the wit to sort out the big things like global warming and getting us out of this recession. When bankers screw up, we demand their heads and their jobs, not defend them. MP's should be no different".
The beeb tonight is concentrating on the value for money of some of these claims - you can get horse manure for free, clean chandeliers for much less, and probably should pay much more than £100 to get rid of moles. They make this point like the money is the thing (or maybe I'm the only one who doesn't think that the amounts don't matter). The parliamentary rules on expenses say that one should avoid extravagance and maybe some of these claims don't interpret that accurately, but why fondle such sophistry when we know that MP's themselves have already stated that the rules are flawed. I resent the use of "flawed" or "misguided" as well. These are our rulemakers. THEY make rules for US to follow. When those rules are flawed or misguided, we get rid of them.
Cameron has at least got stuck into his own party and got them to pay it back. Alan Duncan reckons his end is £4,700. He says he'll pay it back just as soon as there is a system to do so (like we all need more of their blessed systems). I don't care for Mr Duncans smirking hand-in-the-till gesture much. Give it to charity, because we're not actually talking about the money. The principle is the thing and giving back the money only balances the fiscal accounts, not the moral ones. An accounting exercise must not be allowed to make this all go away. It must be the start of the process towards reform. And if parliament cannot approach that reform honestly and earnestly, with a sincere desire to root out any opportunity for abuse of our trust, then we need new parliamentarians.
Addenda: Hazel Blears has written a cheque to the Inland Revenue for the money she should have paid in capital gains tax for flipping her homes. She says "what is important to me is what people think". That is the crassest thing I have ever heard and so typical of the modern focus group loving media hugging politician. What people think is not what should matter to them , what is RIGHT is what matters.
Difficult for an Arsenal supporter not to see that and think what an accurate metaphor for how the last couple of weeks have gone.
Sunday, 10 May 2009
Public standard bearers
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Captains Log
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Uh oh
Tonight I would like to spend my time mostly in "my own little world" TM . That's a spin off of REALLIFE that allows you to retreat into a solipsistic bubble where all the other characters are imaginary. But unfortuantely I have elected to watch the Arsenal bravely battle against the odds to maintain a faint silverware lining to their cloud nine dreams. And I have elected to do this amongst friends since my family do not want Mr Hyde showing up again - that beast who kicks holes in doors and snarls the incantation "adebayor, adebayor" endlessly.
So I'm off to The Roxy - 13ft HD screen, draught staropramen, steaming baked cod, leather sofas. Hopefully no mancs (I will ask Malcolm to throw them out - he's a scouse landlord and very obliging). Tomorrow I am going to 15 Hatfields - host of the fantastic LSA launch party and now celebrating one year as being the capitals most environmentally friendly conference venue. I hope to find out more about "sustainable meetings". I may drink some champagne, but that is only so I fit in.