Common Sense Consulting

I am neither particularly accommodating nor tolerant of other people. Therefore it always comes as something of a surprise to me to say that I have never worked with anyone whom I would regard as stupid. Indeed, I have often stood up for people whom others have regarded as incompetent because I knew that with the right supervision - and sometimes training - these individuals could perform well (and often as well if not better than the people who were regarded as good at their jobs). Equally surprising to me is the constant whinging from employers about the problems of younger (and older) ,workers and the lack of people available to do particular jobs, whether skilled or unskilled, amongst UK nationals. As something of a networker (a highly skilled one in fact) I know there are plenty of people around for all manner of work, provided you aren't prejudiced against, for example, people with too few or to many qualifications, and with too little or too much experience, or those who "don't seem to fit" a particular context : something which seems to be more important these days for some reason.

In my professional and working life, I tend to view people objectively. Everyone has their strong and weak points. Equally, people whom I would not seek out as friends make perfectly good work colleagues (and vice versa). This is not to say that I do not have good friends amongst people with whom I also have professional relationships, but one type of relationship need not assume another. In fact, some of my most enduring and successful business relationships are with people I know little of personally. Friendship is inevitably subjective and, lets face it, friends often fall out over subjective things. The good thing about professional and working relationships is that they generally occur within an enterprise (whether commercial, social or some combination of the two) which gives them some objective structure and, indeed, objectives.

As mentioned earlier, I have noticed a growing pre-occupation amongst employers, and also workers, with recruiting people who "fit in" with them. This may have something to do with the New Labour administration which has "cascaded down" into the wider community. The need for people to "fit in" has certainly, from my perspective, gained momentum in recent years, and, I would argue, is a often a more important requirement - for consultants as well as employees - than hard skills and experience. At the higher level of decision-making, I will call it, this "fitting-in" often accompanies a certain requirement for "group think" when major investments with an equally major public interest dimension, for instance, are being embarked upon. On the office or shop floor, "fitting in" often has more to do with shared life circumstances and/or outlook. On balance, there is a strong presumption in favour of family-orientated people (even amongst the young and "gay") of conventional values - which may be one reasons why Polish workers are so well regarded - who attach considerable importance, consciously or unconsciously, to group "equilibrium".

Is this all a good thing ? Not from my perspective, professionally and, for that matter, personally. One of the most worrying trends I have observed is what could be described as "a requirement for the willing suspension of common sense", or put another way, organisations of all types increasingly require a certain aptitude for stupidity. Let me provide an example. Someone recently described to me the "brainwashing" (their words) process which recruits to the call centre operations of a highly reputable company in this country are required to undergo. As it happened, I knew a young man with joint United Kingdom-United States citizenship who had recently been recruited to the organisation in question. A lovely - and by no means stupid - chap, he could perfectly fulfil the requirement for common sense suspension. It came as no surprise to me therefore, that recent callers to a radio phone-in about call centres should complain, almost unanimously, about the "stupidity" of the call handlers at these centres. Personally, I don't use them !

The woman - a very sharp lady in fact - who described the "brain washing" of call centre recruits had, as it happened, just recruited the young man mentioned to the centre described above. Like many people, she possesses a strong aptitude for Orwellian "doublethink" which forms an increasingly important part of the personal and professional tool-set for "getting on" these days. By "doublethink", I mean a recognition that something may be, for wont of a more elegant expression on my part, "a load of old cobblers" but you buy into this nevertheless, particularly if doing so means alot of money could be coming your way, either organisationally, personally or both. Indeed, it is almost certainly the case that the greatest instances of both doublethink and the willing suspension of common sense occur at the higher levels of organisations, decision-making and salary scale (not to say bonuses) which is rather worrying, I feel, both professionally and personally. For herein lies the two of the main conditions for great disasters amongst private sector corporations and public institutions.

Therefore, I'm sticking with common sense consulting, even if some clients won't buy it !

carry-on-communities.gov.uk : an e-pantomine

Please note that my e-panto (sort of) will be online next week.

Seasons Greetings in the meantime !

National Planning Mediation Service

One of the more sensible ideas to be endorsed by the recently published Barker Review of Land Use Planning* is that of a "Planning Mediation Service" which would form part of the Planning Inspectorate. The success of such a service - should the Government decide to precede with one - will depend upon the timing of the meditor's intervention in the planning process. If this comes at the options stage of plan and project development, mediation could work very well.
However, if the service is intended to coerce objectors into supporting policies or schemes where there is a wrongful presumption in favour of development (ie options have not been fully worked through), I anticipate mediation will be viewed with some scepticism, if not outright cynicism.

* I shall be reviewing this review next year.

The Prospect of an Independent Scotland

It is not without irony that the prospect of an independent Scotland should gather momentum under a British New Labour Government dominated by Scots like Chancellor Gordon Brown and Home Secretary John Reid (another possible contender for prime minister ?)

Although I have a Scottish surname, I don't feel a particularly strong connection with Scotland, having been brought up and educated in North Wales, and lived most of my adult life in Southern England. I do, however, consider myself British, with ancestors from all parts of the UK and Ireland, as well as close relatives in Australia.

Nevertheless, I have some sympathy with those who would like to see independence for Scotland and, indeed, for Wales. This is, after all, a regional issue. London-based government has far too strong an influence over the English regions and other countries of Britain. Notwithstanding Scottish and Welsh devolution and the creation of regional government in England, the economic and political power of London has increased under New Labour, largely because of the policies of the Treasury, and the "globalisation ideology" at the heart of the Blair Government which emphasises the role of London.

Therefore, the prospect of an independent Scotland - should the Scottish Nationalist Party come to power - is something I view with interest and sympathy (if that's the right word), but do not necessarily support. This was also my position when I lived in Wales in relation to the prospect of Welsh independence. However, if I lived there now - or indeed in Scotland - I might feel differently.

Ideological or Evidence-based Policy-Making ?

We're regularly told by people who should know (better ?) that evidence-based policy-making has triumphed over ideology-based policy during the New Labour administration of Britain. However, I wonder whether this is true in the case of the UK's current involvement in Iraq. I have my doubts, and not only on this policy issue. Either way, perhaps the law of unintended serious consequences should be consulted in advance of major new policy offensives at home and abroad.

Postscript to My Previous Blog on Housing and Depression

As I was still pondering the housing market last Friday afternoon, another radio item came up which struck me as something of a syncronicity. This time the subject was the Spanish housing market which apparently has some 3 million empty appartments, more "homes" having been constructed there in the last (recent ?) year(s) than in Britain, France and Germany combined.
Meanwhile, there were protests on the streest of Madrid by many ordinary working people for whom home purchase is unaffordable, although 50 year mortgages are on offer (as they are in this country). So much for housing supply being the core problem in providing "affordable" homes ! UK Government take note !

The Housing Market and Psychological Depression

There was an item on the radio recently which reported that the subject of depression (pyschological rather than economic) was replacing house prices as the talking point for Londoners. I far as I'm led to believe the London housing market is buoyant - albeit more bouyant for some people than others - and it was unclear from the item whether it was homeowners or non-homeowners for whom the subject of depression was coming to the fore.

I would suggest (although I am not a psychologist, except like most people in an amateur way)
that psycholiogical depression tends to exist where there are "uncertainties, troubles, doubts" (to use a literary quotation of whose origin I am uncertain), and, possibly, deeper clinical or "structural" problems. There are also some "uncertainties, troubles, doubts" around the UK housing market just now, in London and elsewhere, together with structural concerns.

Those people who have experienced a depressed housing market in the not-so-distant past may tend to wonder whether house price mechanisms are "bi-polar", and having entered a manic phase in recent years may yet plunge again into another depression, particularly in some areas, at some point in the future. "What goes up, must come down" as they say. Yet we are (re-)assured by official sources that the housing market is in a state of unprecedented strength.

There are certainly unprecedented forces bouying up the UK housing market at present, particularly in London, and in parts of London more than in others. One of these is the global growth in the number of people (individuals and organisations) with money to spend on housing and property in general, and for whom London/UK is an attractive destination. Thus it should come as no surprise that the UK is currently the world's Number One destination for inward investment, and that alot of this investment is in property (from mega commercial schemes to small housing portfolios). Aside from "foreigners" buying property, UK national have also invested hugely in "bricks and mortar" in recent years beyond their own immediate accommodation needs. Thus, in retrospect, it is hardly surprising that house prices have risen.

A number of questions arise from the above trends. Are these trends really good for the economy in general, especially in the longer term ? Linked to this question : is the housing market sustainable - economically, environmentally and socially ? My answer to both these questions is probably not, and, therefore, I'm not at all surprised that people, perhaps especially in London, are starting to feel dpressed about it all.

"There's a bit of a recession on at the moment"

This morning I met one of the most entrepreneurial people I've come across in Worcester, having a cigarette outside her business premises. During our short conversation, she expressed the view that : "There's a bit of a recession on the moment". This is certainly my impression too , and I responded that, for me, "the "recession in some sectors had been going on for a long time". The entrepreneurial young woman, an excellent salesperson whose work brings her into contact with a wide range of commerical and not-for-profit organisations, agreed that there is indeed a "problem" with the "real" economy. Therein lies the problem. As far as I can make out, this Government and those with a serious stakeholding in its policiesinhabit a different economic reality from the rest of us : a theme I shall take up in subsequent posts.

There's No Accounting For Taste

I can sympathise with schools encountering problems with their pupils's take-up of the healthy meals inspired by Jamie Oliver's "School Dinners". Last year, a cat decided to relocate from his hard working family's home, where he was the recipient of a top-brand organic catfood, to live with me. He soon displayed a strong preference for one of Tesco's own brand non-organic ready meals, even when given the option of fresh meat. This, or course, raises a number of ethical issues, including an additional requirement to shop at Tescos. Nevertheless, the cat seems quite healthy, engaging in a reasonable amount of exercise : mainly fighting with other cats in the early hours of the morning. He mostly spends the rest of his time sleeping.

Returning to Jamie Oliver, I must be one of the few people not to have a followed his various TV shows, although I understand that his appearance in advertisements for Sainsburys is generally regarded as having helped improve their fortunes. It seems to me that the "Food Issue" has tended to polarise people between those who are obsessed with what they eat, and those who prefer the most convenient option, whether take-away or ready meal. Personally, I find both extremes equally unattractive. People who are fixated with food can be rather tedious. There's nothing like a foodie to make me reach for the salted peanuts, crisps and a few bottles of lager. However, a diet which consisted only of these could be quite limiting, not to say unhealthy.

Nevertheless, it has come to my attention that some people, young and old, who seem to live quite unhealthy lives in terms of what they eat and drink still stay remarkably healthly, whilst other food fad following folk are always ailing. I've no doubt this can be attributed to other factors such as genetic make-up, predisposition to allergies, and general lifestyle and wellbeing.
Personally, I have quite a fondness for oily and fatty foods. One consequence of this seems to be that I find the British Winter easier to cope with than many people. Indeed I've taken animal fats seriously ever since I heard Clarissa Dickson-Wright (my chef of preference to Jamie Oliver) say that these are an excellent tonic for seasonal adjustment disorder : No SAD for me !

Calm Down, I'm only a Pedestrian & Cyclist !

This morning's chilly wind suggests that the season of the woolly hat may be upon us. In my case, this means a fleecy Russian-looking peaked one with ear muffs, which evokes the same reaction in some people as the sight of hooded youths.

To illustrate this, shortly after the introduction of the "Hunting Ban", and attired in my woolly hat and anorak, I spotted Mr Fox himself, Michael Foster, the New Labour MP for Worcester. The subject on which I wished to speak to Mr Foster was planning, although I'm no fan of the "ban". Perhaps detecting a lack of empathy, Mr Foster, on seeing me approach him attempted to dash into the offices of the Transport and General Workers Union. However, I was too quick for him. No sooner had he disembarked from his "People Mover" than I had accosted him with hand outstretched. On hearing the words "planning", and "pedestrians and cyclists" from me, I noticed an expression of relief pass over Mr Foster's face. Equally, I had the strong impression that this was an MP of which not much useful action could be expected ! However, even on the subject on planning, Mr Foster had cause to be nervous as someone who had a swimming pool constructed in his garden without planning permission (which Worcester City Council, rather supinely in my opinion, granted retrospectively).

The great irony is that if I'm cycling along Worcestershire's country roads, similary attired in my woolly hat, and chance to meet one of the local hunts, the Master is just as likely to look nervous at my approach as Mr Foster. For my appearance no doubt evokes the possibility, if not now of a saboteur, of someone who might still regard people charging around on horses as a reminder of the class war and, therefore, legitimate target for abuse. However, my gripe with the Hunt is altogether different, and concerns the "fitness" of horses which follow hounds . The other day one horse dropped dead on the road, and whilst this was almost certainly a tragic misfortune of the kind that can happen to people out jogging, it was also a reminder of the importance of "fittening" horses in advance of the Hunting Season. In my experience, fitness work happens rather less these days than it should for a variety of reasons, and I have yet to "meet" a horse in Worcestershire myself whom I would regard as fit for hunting, although I'm sure they do exist.

The one group of people who didn't seem intimidated by my appearance were Chinese business executives (from the car industry ?) who greeted me most courteously at Droitwich railway station to inquire after the next train to Worcester. Perhaps they thought me one of few remaining English peasants : perhaps at heart I am.

Continuing the Theme of Sea Change

My previous blog dealt with the use of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), and, more specifically, the failure to use this in a situation where it would seem to be required (by the European Union Directive).

There is currently tremendous hot air (ie talk) around the subject of global warming. It should be said that the earth has been hotter (and colder) in the not so distant past (ie since the Middle Ages), and sea levels considerably higher in the same period.

However, in these earlier times of warmer weather and higher sea levels, Britain had a fraction of the population and "settlement" that it does today. People could move relatively easily to new locations in both this country and abroad, without the problems such migrations would have now

The prospect of global warming (or cooling) and rising sea levels at the present time, and the role of "man-made pollution" in this, carries enormous challenges because of the scale of human population and the technological lifestyles/aspirations of (over)developed/developing nations.

The fact is that despite enormous talk since the late 1980s when the prospect of global warming was acknowledged as a potentially serious threat to world economic stability, with momentous social as well as environmental consequences, "greenhouse emissions" have continued to rise.

In my own areas of work, the problem of rising emissions is both surprising and not. With regard to building and power generation, for instance, we have had the technology (but alas not the will !) since the 1980s to considerably reduce the production of green house gases at source.

Taxation and other fiscal measures to "make the polluter pay" have also received immense attention in the same period, but with some exceptions, the polluter hasn't paid enough in most cases, especially in the area of transport, where people and goods traffic has continued to grow.

Periods, in the UK anyway, when green house gases have gone down or stabilised have co-incided with recessions and post-recessions. This happened between 1990-1996, after which emissions rose again. Many therefore regard economic "growth" as the core problem.

However, this view is anathema to most governments around the world, including our own. For these a "technical fix" must be available to enable economies to continue to grow and greenhouse gases to decline. This would indeed be a "sea change", but can we really "fix" one ?

Proper use of SEA might be one good place to start !

A SEA Change - The Use of Strategic Environmental Assessment

I "launched" this blog on 1 June 2006 with a post entitled "East London/Thames Gateway Road-based River Crossings", promising further blogs on these subjects, so here we go again....

Incidentally, this post is going to provide the basis of correspondence with government departments next week. Re-Use, Re-Cycle if you can and Save Energy in such endeavours !

In my evidence to the Thames Gateway Bridge (TGB) Public Inquiry about this time last year, I argued that Transport for London (TfL) should have provided a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for their proposal in order to demonstrate, amongst other things, that a full "Options Appraisal" (including appropriate public consultations) had been undertaken.

The best explanation that I've found of how the European Union Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive takes effect in member states is in an article in the August 2004 edition of the Journal of Planning Law (JPL). I mention this because, although the British government has produced its own guidance on the implementation of the SEA Directive, it seems that use of SEA to date has been somewhat "optional".

Thus TfL, for instance, have incorporated SEA into their work on behalf of the Mayor of London into the proposed introduction of a "Low Emissions Zone" for the Greater London area (published in July 2006), but not in relation to a road-based river crossing in East London which, on their own evidence, would add significantly to local air pollution.

Returning to the JPL article, this excellent account of "The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes" by Jonathan Robinson and David Elvin QC states in its opening paragraph that SEA :

"....fills the gap not covered by the environmental impact directive 85/337/EEC in requiring the transparent assessment of the likely environmental effects of the hierarchy of plans and programmes which have a strategic role in directing not only development but other interventions in the environment".

The potential application of SEA is therefore very wide indeed. Moreover, just because SEA has been conducted at one level of plan development, does not preclude its use at a "lower" level of specificity.

With regard to the TGB, SEA is a statutory requirement for the East London Sub-Regional Development Framework, the planning context most relevant to the assessment of options for improving cross-river transport access. However, at the time of the TGB Public Inquiry, progress on the development framework (not yet subject to SEA) lagged behind that of the proposal before the inquiry : one reason for arguing that promotion of the TGB is premature.

In this type of situation, it is usual for the promoter of a particular scheme to argue that this cannot be delayed because the planning context is evolving, and this is what happened. Equally, it could be argued that TfL's case for the TGB was also evolving : one of the main reasons an inquiry predicted to last 4-6 weeks went on for nearly a year.

I understand that the TGB Inquiry Planning Inspectors are to submit their report to the Department for the Communities and Local Government (DCLG) very soon. DCLG is now the "custodian" of planning and, therefore, the use of Strategic Environmental Assessment. My recommendation, which I put to the Inquiry, is that TfL return to the "Options Stage" in considering additional cross-river transport access in East London. In other words, I'm looking for a SEA change from these proceedings !

Left Soft on Solutions

There is rather a good piece in the Comment Section of today's Guardian entitled "A cloistered metropolitan elite is in denial about Britain" by John Harris, whose photograph shows a young man who looks a bit like the singer Paul Weller (later of Red Wedge) during the early 1980s. I'm largely in agreement with what Mr Harris has to say, with one exception, his presumption(?) that only the centre-left is really interested in the subject matter of his article : "inequality".

Whilst organisations like the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR), Demos and the Young Foundation will I'm sure be sympathetic to Mr Harris's message (even if "a former editor of a tabloid newpaper" was not), one problem with these manifestations of the centre-left is that they have been soft on real solutions, or at least ones that have taken root in the body politic. Indeed, I would argue that the John Major government was stronger on solutions than this one.

There have been some excellent analyses of inequality by "the soft left", including Professor Robert Macdonald's study of "Disconnected Youth" in Middlesbrough, published last year by Palgrave. However, these analyses have not led to the development of coherent policies by the present government to tackle the sort of problem "indicators" identified in Mr Harris's article , and perhaps most of all that "abiding sense that the good life was happening somewhere else".

So why has the centre-left been soft on solutions to tackle inequality ? This might well provide the subject for another article by Mr Harris. One reason, I would suggest, is the tendency for the soft left, however well intentioned, to inhabit a rather cloistered world of its own, all be this rather less grand that that inhabited by New Labour and its adherents in the media etc.

Know the Difference between Objectivity and Aspiration

I often wonder why organisations and individuals willingly submit themselves to being mercilessly ripped off. My guess is that their abililty to distinguish objectivity and aspiration is temporarily, and in some cases permanently, suspended. The phrase "willing suspension of disbelief" comes to mind.

To explore my theory, I'm going to use two "case studies" : the Private Finance Initiative (PFI); and horse purchase.

The word "aspirational" first properly entered my psyche when I had an unplanned meeting with a senior army officer - unplanned because he'd planned to be elsewhere but bad weather prevented this - regarding a project in which the army took an interest. This gentleman's use of the word "aspirational" had a particular resonance for me on two counts. Firstly, it was clear that aspiration was a core value for him, personally and professionally, and, secondly, I intimated that my own proposals (and person !) might be insufficiently aspirational.

A few years passed and I had occasion to "revisit" the same army establishment, which in the meantime had recieved substantial investment under a PFI scheme. In my opinion, this scheme had all the hallmarks of a typical PFI project. There had indeed been substantial capital investment ie new construction. However, this had brought with it new and equally substantial operating costs. Various new initiatives were now being contemplated to cover these costs, and additional funds sought for further capital works.

This kind of situation is familiar to (?) the majority of local health trusts who have embarked upon major new hospital (re)construction using the PFI in recent years. The Worcestershire Royal Hospital, a new facility on the outskirts of the city of Worcester, is a classic example of what can go wrong.

PFI is now widely regarded as a "bad deal" for the public sector, and particularly for the National Health Service. It was conceived under the previous Conservative administration to "get around" public spending constraints. However, under New Labour it has been a key component of "the building boom" on which the wider ecomony is now so dependent. We have a construction industry which is hungry for more PFI projects, regardless of whether these are in the best interests of potential "clients" for such projects, or the general tax payer.

Yet PFI has fulfilled the aspirations of the public sector for new infrastructure, and the new hospitals, schools etc that have sprung up, notwithstanding their frequently poor design (for purpose), are hailed as one of the great successes of aspirational New Labour.

The zeitgeist of the present time is aspirational, and there is a Mephistopheles around every corner, or so it seems, with whom to enter into a Faustian pact.

Horse purchase is another case in point. There is nothing new in the tendency for new (or newer) comers to horse purchase to acquire animals which are too energetic and/or big for them, and to find that the ongoing resources (time, money etc) required to maintain a horse are more burdensome than the capital outlay. The horse world, like that of PFI, also has a plentiful supply of professionals to complicate matters, and - although some do provide a genuine good service - many "trade" on the aspirations of their clients, sometimes with serious consequences.

So my message to potential horsebuyers and procurers of other major capital projects is know the difference between objectivity (including objectives) and aspirations, it may save you alot of money (and possibly your life). Also know that - as someone once said - "there are as many certified charlatans as uncertified ones" out there to part fools from their money.

On Being Advised to Set Myself Up in Business as a Witch

When I was a relatively young woman in about 1991, a "mentor" of sorts suggested to me that I set myself up in business as a witch "before anyone does".

I should explain that my mentor was a well-known transport consultant, someone both accomplished in the creative thinking (or "ideas") department, and in the implementation process. He was, in short, a bit of a wizard himself.

Nevertheless, as someone who took herself a bit more seriously then than now, I was not sure how to take his comments, other than with a slightly uneasy laugh.

Like all good mentors, mine had obviously spotted some professional potential of which I was not yet aware, and also an emerging market for a new type of service.

In the meantime, of course, an increasing number of women (and some men) have set themselves up as witches. It should be said that, although this is by no means a new profession,
its public acceptance has grown in recent years, almost to the point of respectability.

But not quite ! Being a witch does still not carry the same "position" of, say, a transport planner, as my mentor well knew.

Now, where's my broomstick ?

The Power of Pissed-off People

From time to time it occurs to me that I haven't had as much to say on "business and management consulting" as on certain other topics, so it's time to rectify this.

One of the world's best known business and management gurus, Tom Peters, wrote in his book "Re-Imagine" (published 2003) : "I happen to believe that all innovation comes, not from market research or carefully-crafted focus groups, but from pissed-off people". I don't agree with everything Tom Peters has to say by any means, but on the role of pissed-off people in innovation I'm largely in agreement with him. Others, of course, may disagree.

It was this feeling of being "pissed-off" that first led me to take a serious interest in "management" in the mid-1980s. The big issue for me then, as now, was the failure of government agencies planning new infrastructure to adopt a process whereby project options, including alternative development scenarios (eg more environmetally appropriate), could be properly assessed.

Fortunately, alot of other people were also very pissed-off about this, and it has been precisely "the power of pissed-off people" which has, I'm pleased to say, led to some improvements in the appraisal process. However, in my experience if those with a vested interest in the construction of a certain project can find a way around having to go through a full options appraisal, including proper public consultation, they will.

So "Power to the Pissed-off People", I say, for without this I beleive it would be very much a permanent "business as usual scenario" for government agencies and consulting companies.

Treasury more User-Friendly than Communities Department ?

As mentioned in my earlier blog "Globalisation and Discontent", the Treasury and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) are conducting parallel reviews broadly covering the areas of regeneration and economic development. The DCLG review was instigated when these matters came under the authority of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, and an extension of the review was announced last Summer after the creation of the new department. No report has yet emerged. The Treasury, after one unacknowledged email, have now told me that there is 3 weeks to submit material to their review, with a further opportunity for comment at a later stage. After several unacknowledged emails to the DCLG, I have now received a reply from a human being. I had electronic replies to a couple of my emails to the effect that the intended human recipient was on "Annual Leave", but the alternative email address provided did not respond. However, I have now received a rather snooty reply from DCLG stating that the deadline for submissions to their review passed in May. My understanding is, nevertheless, that the review is still ongoing, and I shall submit "comments" anyway (ie a copy of those I send to the Treasury).

On Keeping Up Appearances and The Tribes of Worcester

During the summer in Worcester I met with two guys from the US on the trail of the British TV sitcom "Keeping up Appearances". I'm usually quite good with accents, both placing and understanding. However, it was a while before I could catch what these two were talking about. They were brothers and looked liked two people from the Cohen Brothers film Fargo. Anyway, it transpired that they were great fans of "Keeping Up Appearances", and as Hyacinth Bucket, the heroine of the show, collected Royal Worcester (or so they told me) they wanted to check some out. They also told me that many American men strongly identified with Hyacinth's husband, Richard. Apparently, "Keeping Up Appearances" was an unexpected succes in the US, and indeed a sequel was brought out for the "market" there.

One reason I took to these brothers was that their rather curious accents and appearance made me feel quite uneccentric myself. There's nothing better than feeling a bit superior to other people, as Hyacinth Bucket would tell us. These sentiments are going to lead me into some reflections on "The Tribes of Worcester", where I may well touch on the politically incorrect and for which I offer no apology. Before this let me put my reflections into context. The "Big People Problems" (which I could count on one hand) that I've experienced in life have always been with other white middle class people. I've had few problems with people of other religions, races, nationalities, or, for that matter, social class. This may well be the case for most people : your own "social group" is probably the most troublesome to you, even if you aren't yet aware of it.

Last week, whilst in the "Ladies" of a major retailer in Worcester, I overheard a young well-spoken woman say : "I don't want to live in England". This was said in a loud voice, with something of a histrionic gesture. I was curious but resisted asking her why. Nevertheless, the opportunity to do so arose when I found myself next to her on the "down" escalator. She seemed very open to giving her reasons (I like this in people) and identified a number of issues which I would describe as "planning-related", but won't deal with these now. The "reason" for which she seemed to have most passion, was "having to dress like a chav" in order to prevent herself from being "beaten up". In other words, she had to "conform" to a certain "popular culture" in order to fit in, and she didn't feel comfortable about this.

Now it did occur to me during our conversation that I might be dressed like a chav. I'm not really sure what a "chav" is, or how they dress, but felt it might have something to do with wearing a kind of leisure outfit (cargo pants etc) which, as a cyclist, I mostly do. However, I also realised from my manner of speech (and possibly because I'm too old) this young woman did not consider me to be a "chav". In response to her analysis of the pressure of "popular culture", I acknowledged my feeling that there does seem to be some"inverted snobbery" in Worcester. Silently, I also acknowledged to myself that, in certain situations, in might be appropriate for a young well-spoke middle class woman to "unveil" herself as a "chav", for instance by wearing trousers well down her bottom cleavage (which I don't).

Having covered "inverted snobbery", I now want to deal with snobbery of the good-old fashioned sort. Walking along a Worcester street just now, I noticed a lawyer of my acquaintance coming towards me. The people with him looked like local farmers, and I vaguely recognised one man. I could see that the lawyer did not want to speak to me, and he attempted to pass me with the barest of acknowledgement, although there seemed no great urgency about his business, given the manner of his converstion. Its fair to say that I've had some past and prospective horse business with this man, and was I somewhat annoyed by his attitude so I seized the moment. As the "gentleman" passed me I asked him how his horse was, and, when he tried to snub me, asked him whether he'd sold him yet.

The response was negative and by now the man was trying to escape, so in my good loud horsey voice I shouted after him that I'd like to have a look at the horse again, and that I'd give him a call (which I might do). From my perspective, whilst this man thinks of himself as a "horseman", I think of him as a "competitor" (see my earlier blog "On the Importance of Being a Good Punter"). Thus whilst I like the look, and temperament, of the horse he has for sale (which has also won some major show classes), I'm not convinced that this has the robustness of the "worker" for which I'm currently looking. Incidentally, the saying goes that there are three kinds of horses : working horses, show horses, and horses's arses. The other thing is that this man is a lawyer, and I have some acquired prejudice for his "tribe".

Why Cycling 4 me Beats Driving a 4x4 (or "On Yer Bikes Ladies" !)

I've noticed an increasing tendency, which seems to me to be particularly strong in Worcester/shire, for people to "judge" others on fairly superficial criteria. For instance, I do not own or have access to a car, something which has been the case for most of my adult life, yet this does not greatly inhibit my enjoyment of outdoor pursuits, including horse riding, in the semi-rural parts of the County. However, I am aware that others regard my carlessness as "odd".

To illustrate this, last year I travelled regularly to "Archers Country" near Hanbury in North Worcestershire. This involved a short train journey with my bicyle from Worcester to Droitwich, followed by a cycle ride of 6-7 miles, and back, of course. No big deal ! I managed this trip, which involved crossing a ford using a footbridge, on a twice weekly basis throughout the winter months. The purpose of my journey was to ride a horse, which I enjoyed very much.

Yet I knew that my bike marked me out as "different", at best a fitness fanatic (certainly not !) but more probably eccentric (possibly !). It was difficult to establish much rapport with people at the yard where I rode. Experience has taught me that when such rapport cannot be built up, it is best to withdraw from the situation. Otherwise, a small incident or disagreement can become a a very big deal. So I stopped visiting "Archers Country" on a regular basis.

Some while later, whilst cyling along a semi-rural road in South East Worcestershire from another yard, I saw ahead of me a woman on a horse who had been at the other livery yard. She and her friend had now moved into the area. We had quite a long roadside conversation, although I still felt my bike marked me out for her as someone "different". The funny thing is, one of the reasons she had moved from the other yard was the ford, which could be fast flowing in the winter, even for her 4x4 (which she had been worried about). Ho ! Ho !

& Putting this Blog in the Context of My Othe Blogs

Given this increasing preference, which I suspect goes much wider than Worcester/shire, to use fairly superficial criteria to "get the measure" of other people, I want to "give some context" to my "Janet Mackinnon" blog. In fact, I am in the process of developing a number of blogs, 3 of which I'll mention now :

• The Edge of Town
• Janet Stone &
• The Green Man Project

Here's a little more detail :

The Edge of Town
The psychiatrist and metaphysician Carl Jung identified a "shadow" side of the human psyche. "The Edge of Town" explores the transferrence of this shadow into our environments, whether in the form of pollution, destruction of the countryside and rural communities, or the darker side of urban life and human existence. "The Edge of Town" is, therefore, a physical, psychological and, perhaps, metaphysical "place".

Janet Stone
Reflections on "New Paradigm" (including so-called "New Age") themes and trends in science, health, education, spirituality, and thinking on "human potential". Janet "Stone" is the alias of Janet Mackinnon in her quest for "the Philosopher's Stone".

The Green Man Project
Exploration of the links between local history and wildlife, landscape, archaeology, craft industry and folk culture, including animal husbandry and equestrian heritage. References to good practice in local conservation from around the world, and to other practical, creative and therapeutic initiatives which evoke the spirit of The Green Man and Woman.

Another way of looking at these blogs is as follows :

• Janet Mackinnon (my real world/everyday concerns)
• The Edge of Town (in which I confront the "shadow" of everyday things)
• Janet Stone (the potential for human development with "paradigm shift")
• The Green Man Project (integrating the everyday, the "dark" and the "light")

I hope no one will find all this strange or threatening. It will be an interesting ride.

The Difference between "Alright" and "All Right"

As a child when asked how I was my reply of choice was "Alright", meaning "OK", although I was encouraged to say "Very well, thank you" by some people. However, "Alright" suited me better. I think most people would describe their general state of being as "OK". Some things in life may be good or even great, but other things are generally less so. "Alright" covers this centre ground between the good and the less good, or bad.

"All Right" has differtent connotations altogether. "He's doing All Right" is generally taken to mean he's doing very well indeed. However, this expression can be taken to extremes. Wasn't there an aspirant US presidential candidate in the last elections who chanted "All Right" in a rather embarrassing fashion, only to get knocked out of the race. He had been doing "Alright" before, and then things went "pear-shaped" (an expression I'll cover in the future).

In the context of "I'm All Right Jack" (my previous blog), there is a further play on words. Not only is the hero of that film apt to do "All Right" for himself. His views are also "All Right", or he is always right (in his own opinion). The word play is highly relevant to the mores of "The Ruling Classes" just now. There is a strong tendency to view people who do "All Right" for themselves, (ie make alot of money) as somehow "All Right" in other respects.

This is a great mistake, particularly for political parties in receipt of large loans and donations.