Friday, September 06, 2013
SYRIAN CRISIS : WHO'S PULLING WHOSE STRINGS?
Few would deny that Vladimir Putin is an ambiguous figure, or that the sale of Russian weapons to Syria is helping to fuel the crisis there. However, those arming the Syrian opposition, including Saudi Arabia, cannot be regarded as any more progressive than Russia. The emerging consensus, reflected in the UK Parliament's vote of last week, that the crisis requires multi-lateral action led by the United Nations was finely articulated by the UN's former Chief Weapons Inspector, Hans Blix, this morning on BBC Radio 4's Today Programme. Blix called into question former British prime minister Tony Blair's role as a "protagonist for intervention" in Syria, presumably in his capacity as Middle East Peace Envoy. I say "presumably" because it is never very clear whose interests Blair represents, other than his own. What is quite remarkable is that one with a record on the international scene arguably even more ambiguous than that of Mr Putin should still be treated so uncritically by the BBC and many others.
Thursday, September 05, 2013
FAT CAT PLAYS WITH OSBORNE & BALLS PUPPETS
Wednesday, September 04, 2013
WEF GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS INDEX 2013-14
The World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index 2013-14, published yesterday, has the following top 10 ranking:
1. Switzerland
2. Singapore
3. Finland
4. Germany
5. United States
6. Sweden
7. Hong Kong SAR
8. Netherlands
9. Japan
10. United Kingdom
Britain's position in the "Country Profile Highlights" is described thus:
"The United Kingdom (10th) rounds out the top 10, falling by two places in this year’s assessment. The country deteriorates slightly in several areas, most notably its macroeconomic environment and its financial markets. Overall, the United Kingdom benefits from clear strengths such as the efficiency of its labor market (5th), in sharp contrast to the rigidity of those of many other European countries. The country continues to have sophisticated (9th) and innovative (12th) businesses that are highly adept at harnessing the latest technologies for productivity improvements and operating in a very large market (it is ranked 6th for market size). The highly developed financial market also remains a strength overall, despite some weakening since last year. All these characteristics are important for spurring productivity enhancements. On the other hand, the country’s macroeconomic environment (115th, down from 85th two years ago) represents the greatest drag on its competitiveness, with a fiscal deficit above 8 percent in 2012, an increase of over 7 percentage points in public debt amounting to 90.3 percent of GDP in 2012 (136th), and a comparatively low national savings rate (10.8 percent of GDP in 2012, 122nd)."
The full report is available at http://reports.weforum.org/the-global-competitiveness-report-2013-2014
1. Switzerland
2. Singapore
3. Finland
4. Germany
5. United States
6. Sweden
7. Hong Kong SAR
8. Netherlands
9. Japan
10. United Kingdom
Britain's position in the "Country Profile Highlights" is described thus:
"The United Kingdom (10th) rounds out the top 10, falling by two places in this year’s assessment. The country deteriorates slightly in several areas, most notably its macroeconomic environment and its financial markets. Overall, the United Kingdom benefits from clear strengths such as the efficiency of its labor market (5th), in sharp contrast to the rigidity of those of many other European countries. The country continues to have sophisticated (9th) and innovative (12th) businesses that are highly adept at harnessing the latest technologies for productivity improvements and operating in a very large market (it is ranked 6th for market size). The highly developed financial market also remains a strength overall, despite some weakening since last year. All these characteristics are important for spurring productivity enhancements. On the other hand, the country’s macroeconomic environment (115th, down from 85th two years ago) represents the greatest drag on its competitiveness, with a fiscal deficit above 8 percent in 2012, an increase of over 7 percentage points in public debt amounting to 90.3 percent of GDP in 2012 (136th), and a comparatively low national savings rate (10.8 percent of GDP in 2012, 122nd)."
The full report is available at http://reports.weforum.org/the-global-competitiveness-report-2013-2014
Monday, September 02, 2013
ANGELA MERKEL: GOVERNMENT IS FOR GROWN-UPS
One of the most annoying aspects of New Labour's zenith, fortunately now long passed, was its adulation by journalists who should have known better. Amongst the most fawning of these was the Financial Times senior editor Phillip Stephens, who wrote a biography of former prime minister Blair which has been summed up as "engaging and slickly
presented but ultimately lacking in depth". Sounds very New Labour! Along with Blair, Stephens was sounding off last week about Britain's response to the crisis in Syria. Thankfully, we now live in a post-Blair world where parliamentary democracy might actually mean something.
I say "might" because we are not there yet. At the heart of New Labour was a fundamental confusion between politics and government, from which the present Coalition has not yet fully emerged. The ultimate author of this confusion was probably Peter Mandelson rather than Tony Blair. Indeed, Mandelson's autobiography, "The Third Man" published in 2010, is a very good book about politics, but weak on government. As a potted history of the Labour Party from the 1970s it is excellent. Similarly, if one enjoys chintzy insights into the private lives of politicians, the book is eminently readable. However, nowhere does New Labour emerge in it as a credible party of government, and "The Third Man" often comes across as an elegantly written teen diary, whose middle youth protagonists are endlessly pre-occupied with their group status and latest relationship.
To some extent New Labour was also a coalition in all but name, with Lord Mandelson as its king-maker. We now have a genuine Coalition of political expediency and weak government. This has more to do with the composition of the present coalition, rather than the weakness of coalition government per se. Ministerial positions have tended to be allocated to those most politically acceptable to their party leaders, rather than to those best equipped to make the government work for the nation. The same was also true of New Labour. The result is that some of the most able people are excluded from power and thus seek to undermine it. Who ever leads the next government, therefore, needs to look elsewhere for models of coalition leadership, for there is a good chance that the UK (or England, Wales and Northern Ireland) could have another one after the next election.
If Blair was the defining European politician in the early years of the twentieth century, the German Chancellor Merkel has succeeded him in this role, but through substance rather than spin. The new generation of British politicians would do well to look to her style of leadership at home and abroad. Whilst this leadership is not without critics, particularly in those parts of the continent which have borne the brunt of European Union austerity measures to tackle the sovereign debt crisis, it has demonstrated the difference between politics and government. I was surprised that Angela Merkel hardly receives a mention in his autobiography, although Lord Mandelson was European Trade Commissioner when she came to power. His failure to recognise a woman who would emerge as one of the world's most powerful leaders, and a country whose economy was very much on the ascendant, clearly demonstrates that successful government requires grown-ups (and a mature media) to run it.
I say "might" because we are not there yet. At the heart of New Labour was a fundamental confusion between politics and government, from which the present Coalition has not yet fully emerged. The ultimate author of this confusion was probably Peter Mandelson rather than Tony Blair. Indeed, Mandelson's autobiography, "The Third Man" published in 2010, is a very good book about politics, but weak on government. As a potted history of the Labour Party from the 1970s it is excellent. Similarly, if one enjoys chintzy insights into the private lives of politicians, the book is eminently readable. However, nowhere does New Labour emerge in it as a credible party of government, and "The Third Man" often comes across as an elegantly written teen diary, whose middle youth protagonists are endlessly pre-occupied with their group status and latest relationship.
To some extent New Labour was also a coalition in all but name, with Lord Mandelson as its king-maker. We now have a genuine Coalition of political expediency and weak government. This has more to do with the composition of the present coalition, rather than the weakness of coalition government per se. Ministerial positions have tended to be allocated to those most politically acceptable to their party leaders, rather than to those best equipped to make the government work for the nation. The same was also true of New Labour. The result is that some of the most able people are excluded from power and thus seek to undermine it. Who ever leads the next government, therefore, needs to look elsewhere for models of coalition leadership, for there is a good chance that the UK (or England, Wales and Northern Ireland) could have another one after the next election.
If Blair was the defining European politician in the early years of the twentieth century, the German Chancellor Merkel has succeeded him in this role, but through substance rather than spin. The new generation of British politicians would do well to look to her style of leadership at home and abroad. Whilst this leadership is not without critics, particularly in those parts of the continent which have borne the brunt of European Union austerity measures to tackle the sovereign debt crisis, it has demonstrated the difference between politics and government. I was surprised that Angela Merkel hardly receives a mention in his autobiography, although Lord Mandelson was European Trade Commissioner when she came to power. His failure to recognise a woman who would emerge as one of the world's most powerful leaders, and a country whose economy was very much on the ascendant, clearly demonstrates that successful government requires grown-ups (and a mature media) to run it.
Friday, August 30, 2013
THE NEW BRITISH (AND US) ECONOMIC DISEASE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_exports
The British are fond of blaming Europe for regulations which hamper British competitiveness. Environmental legislation is an increasingly popular target for Conservative politicians, and even more so for the United Kingdom Independence Party. Similarly, I note that there are many in the United States who like to blame increasing regulation to protect the environment for the country's declining status as an exporter. In this context, the above link to Wikipedia's "list of countries by net exports", based on World Trade Organisation data, should help reframe the issue of national export competitiveness. For it is, in fact, the European Union which is the world's largest net exporter, due largely to the success of Germany which comes second, followed by China. The US and the UK, on the other hand, are the first and second largest net importers in the world. From a domestic perspective - I have not visited the US for many years - this status now constitutes a "British Disease" as much as the malady of that name in the 1970s. According to an article on the German www.zum.de website the original "British Disease refers to the low industrial productivity and frequent labor strifes that plagued Britain in the 1960s and 1970s".* This earlier malady required transformational government, of the kind I do not yet see any prospect of in the UK, or the United States for that matter. This is a real problem because, I would argue, many of the transformations that have occurred since the 1970s now need to be reversed.
* Full article http://www.zum.de/whkmla/sp/changhyun/Thatcher70s2.html
The British are fond of blaming Europe for regulations which hamper British competitiveness. Environmental legislation is an increasingly popular target for Conservative politicians, and even more so for the United Kingdom Independence Party. Similarly, I note that there are many in the United States who like to blame increasing regulation to protect the environment for the country's declining status as an exporter. In this context, the above link to Wikipedia's "list of countries by net exports", based on World Trade Organisation data, should help reframe the issue of national export competitiveness. For it is, in fact, the European Union which is the world's largest net exporter, due largely to the success of Germany which comes second, followed by China. The US and the UK, on the other hand, are the first and second largest net importers in the world. From a domestic perspective - I have not visited the US for many years - this status now constitutes a "British Disease" as much as the malady of that name in the 1970s. According to an article on the German www.zum.de website the original "British Disease refers to the low industrial productivity and frequent labor strifes that plagued Britain in the 1960s and 1970s".* This earlier malady required transformational government, of the kind I do not yet see any prospect of in the UK, or the United States for that matter. This is a real problem because, I would argue, many of the transformations that have occurred since the 1970s now need to be reversed.
* Full article http://www.zum.de/whkmla/sp/changhyun/Thatcher70s2.html
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
SAVING MONEY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Some recent virtual exchanges have encouraged me to ponder the question: "What 's the point of environmentalism?"; and I shall, hopefully with some humour, post on this subject shortly. In the meantime, I'm going to suggest that one function of environmentalism, based upon my own experience, is to help governments, commercial businesses and individuals save money. Over the nearly 30 years I have been professionally involved with planning and environmental issues, the financial stakes have often been high. As a consequence, I have directly helped save the exchequer at least £0.5 billion, and probably prevented one major corporate bankruptcy. Whilst this may be relatively small beer in an age of "Big Banking" and public sector profligacy (yes, I'm afraid it still goes on!), for most people and businesses (most being small) this is a very large sum of money.
The much greater sums of public money required for the proposed new HS2 high speed rail link are now increasingly being called in to question, with the Institute of Directors being the latest organisation to challenge the project's economic value and financial viability. However, such objections have been around since the proposal first surfaced under the previous government. That it did so without a full appraisal of possible alternative options for increasing rail capacity and improving the wider UK transport network is simply testimony to the flawed project management culture of many public institutions, in this case the Department for Transport. Again in my experience, environmental objections to major projects, or portfolios, have often served to highlight the weakness of the planning and appraisal process, which frequently overlooks a number of key issues. This has certainly happened with HS2, where those whose objections are primarily environmental have done a sterling job in highlighting other flaws associated with the proposal.
The much greater sums of public money required for the proposed new HS2 high speed rail link are now increasingly being called in to question, with the Institute of Directors being the latest organisation to challenge the project's economic value and financial viability. However, such objections have been around since the proposal first surfaced under the previous government. That it did so without a full appraisal of possible alternative options for increasing rail capacity and improving the wider UK transport network is simply testimony to the flawed project management culture of many public institutions, in this case the Department for Transport. Again in my experience, environmental objections to major projects, or portfolios, have often served to highlight the weakness of the planning and appraisal process, which frequently overlooks a number of key issues. This has certainly happened with HS2, where those whose objections are primarily environmental have done a sterling job in highlighting other flaws associated with the proposal.
Friday, August 23, 2013
LABOUR'S NEW OUTBREAK OF COMMON SENSE?
I've enjoyed reading the early conspiracy thrillers of Eric Ambler over the summer. A twentieth century novelist of the sensible Left, Ambler writes in straightforward and unpretentious style which may be one of the reasons why his work is experiencing a comeback.
Ambler's novels are full of shysters - defined in the Wikipedia as "someone who acts in a disreputable, unethical, or unscrupulous way, especially in the practice of law, politics or business." This may be another reason why his novels speaks to the present age.
This brings me to the subject of the British Labour Party. The biggest challenges for Ed Miliband, I would suggest, will be to demonstrate that he also belongs to the sensible Left and that he can keep the shysters at bay. Labour also needs to encourage a straightforward and unpretentious public discourse, even if this has become alien to modern British political culture.
Although it is still early days, there seems to be some evidence that the party could renew itself along these lines. On the national scene, recent straight-talking on the proposed high speed rail link between London and the north of England, notwithstanding that Labour came up with this idea in the first place, is to be applauded.
Similarly in my local area of Worcester, a Labour-run coalition involving the Lib-Dems and Greens has started to make sensible-sounding proposals to re-prioritise urban regeneration and sustainable transport planning. Let's just hope the shysters don't derail these!
Returning to the novels of Eric Ambler, these have another lesson for the contemporary British Labour Party: the need for an objective national understanding of international politics, particularly those of Europe. I may be over-optimistic, but it strikes me that this is something which a Labour-led coalition government might just be able to deliver.
PS. Since my posting, a fellow participant in the recent Coursera Introduction to the Law of the EU The Law of the European Union: An Introduction | Coursera has provided the following link to an article in the New York Times about Britain's relationship with Europe: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/opinion/cohen-britains-brussels-syndrome.html?hp&_r=0
Ambler's novels are full of shysters - defined in the Wikipedia as "someone who acts in a disreputable, unethical, or unscrupulous way, especially in the practice of law, politics or business." This may be another reason why his novels speaks to the present age.
This brings me to the subject of the British Labour Party. The biggest challenges for Ed Miliband, I would suggest, will be to demonstrate that he also belongs to the sensible Left and that he can keep the shysters at bay. Labour also needs to encourage a straightforward and unpretentious public discourse, even if this has become alien to modern British political culture.
Although it is still early days, there seems to be some evidence that the party could renew itself along these lines. On the national scene, recent straight-talking on the proposed high speed rail link between London and the north of England, notwithstanding that Labour came up with this idea in the first place, is to be applauded.
Similarly in my local area of Worcester, a Labour-run coalition involving the Lib-Dems and Greens has started to make sensible-sounding proposals to re-prioritise urban regeneration and sustainable transport planning. Let's just hope the shysters don't derail these!
Returning to the novels of Eric Ambler, these have another lesson for the contemporary British Labour Party: the need for an objective national understanding of international politics, particularly those of Europe. I may be over-optimistic, but it strikes me that this is something which a Labour-led coalition government might just be able to deliver.
PS. Since my posting, a fellow participant in the recent Coursera Introduction to the Law of the EU The Law of the European Union: An Introduction | Coursera has provided the following link to an article in the New York Times about Britain's relationship with Europe: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/opinion/cohen-britains-brussels-syndrome.html?hp&_r=0
Sunday, July 07, 2013
THE EUROPEAN UNION IN GLOBAL GOVERNANCE
https://www.iversity.org/courses/the-european-union-in-global-governance
For anyone who would like a higher level of discourse on the future of the European Union than can currently be found in the UK, it might be worth checking out this Massive Open Online Course being run by the Berlin-based Iversity in the Autumn (see above link).
In the meantime, whilst both the UK Conservative and Labour Parties distracted themselves separately with tribal politics, The Economist magazine provided an interesting overview of the European economy:
For anyone who would like a higher level of discourse on the future of the European Union than can currently be found in the UK, it might be worth checking out this Massive Open Online Course being run by the Berlin-based Iversity in the Autumn (see above link).
In the meantime, whilst both the UK Conservative and Labour Parties distracted themselves separately with tribal politics, The Economist magazine provided an interesting overview of the European economy:
European economy guide: Taking Europe's pulse | The Economist
Friday, July 05, 2013
SEX, DRUGS AND ROCK'N ROLL, OLD LADY?
 |
| The Old Lady of Threadneedle Street or Bank of England (Image: Wikipedia) |
Nevertheless, a working week that had began with Mr Carney looking somewhat downbeat ended with a stock market roll, when the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street agreed to maintain interest rates and quantitative easing (or pumping £375billion into the UK economy) for her new suitor. Still, relationships which begin on a high can still end on the rocks, and many will be wondering whether Mr Carney's rock star credentials carry the financial prudence of Mick Jagger, or a penchant for pleasing political mistresses of all parties. The fact that the new Bank of England Governor is sweetheart to both George Osborne and Ed Balls - I jest not! - may also set many wondering whether the addictive rhythm of boom and bust which has so dominated the British economy is indeed here to stay.
Monday, April 15, 2013
THE IRON LADIES: THATCHER AND MERKEL
 |
| Angela Merkel signs a book of condolence for Margaret Thatcher in Berlin (Getty Images) |
That Mr Cameron should find himself caught between the passing of former British prime minister Thatcher and the present leader of both a united Germany and, arguably, a Europe on the brink of greater union does, however, throw powerful light on modern political history. For whilst our Prime Minister may privately regard himself as "the Heir to Blair", it is surely the German Chancellor who is heiress of the original "Iron Lady's" drive for democratic liberation of the former Communist Europe where Angela Merkel spent her earlier life. That those liberated from Communist rule should now look to a strengthened European Union is, of course, an historical legacy which Baroness Thatcher did not anticipate, and a current political predicament for Britain and Mr Cameron.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
MOOCS GOOD FOR LITTLE ENGLANDER'S SOUL
For some years now I've felt more and more like a "Little Englander", or someone lacking a proper view from afar on our shores. This is partly the fault of the British media, notably the BBC, whose coverage of international news is often rather parochial. I'm therefore delighted to have discovered Coursera - www.coursera.org - who offer MOOCs, or Massive Open Online Courses, from some of the world's leading universities for free. Check them out!
Monday, November 26, 2012
CAMERON:CLOUD-CUCKOO-LAND OR LE CARRE?
As a novel for our time, I cannot recommend "A Small Town in Germany" by John le Carre strongly enough, although beware the edition with an introduction by Hari Kunzru as this in my view gives a poor entre to the narrative which follows.
The "small town" of the book's title is Bonn some forty years ago when Britain is conspiring to enter the European Community and Germany is regarded as our key ally. Threatening to jeopardise this special relationship is the supposed defection of a British embassy employee to the Eastern Block, together with the emergence of a new German leader intent on national re-unification.
The book's central theme is British post-war international realpolitik at a time when the nation appears to be in terminal decline. Against this backdrop, there can be few better literary accounts of office politics, encapsulated in the UK's Bonn embassy, where a combination bureaucratic determinism and internal relationship management wrestle with external imperatives.
As I neared the novel's conclusion, it occurred to me that our present government may be run along very similar lines, and that David Cameron could have found his literary equivalent in le Carre's Bonn embassy head honcho, Bradfield.
The arch political manager, Bradfield makes UK's modus operandi clear to the British spy Turner, who has been despatched by the Foreign Office to find the potential defector:
"I'm a great believer in hypocrisy. It's the nearest we ever get to virtue. It's a statement of what we ought to be like.....I did not contract to serve a powerful nation, least of all a virtuous one. All power corrupts. The loss of power corrupts even more. We thank an American for that advice. It's quite true. We are a corrupt nation and we need all the help we can get."
The alternative interpretation of our current prime minister's pronouncements on a range of issues, including private sector investment in infrastructure, is that he has inherited "delusions of Gordon" , or that he dwells in Cloud-Cuckoo-Land.
The "small town" of the book's title is Bonn some forty years ago when Britain is conspiring to enter the European Community and Germany is regarded as our key ally. Threatening to jeopardise this special relationship is the supposed defection of a British embassy employee to the Eastern Block, together with the emergence of a new German leader intent on national re-unification.
The book's central theme is British post-war international realpolitik at a time when the nation appears to be in terminal decline. Against this backdrop, there can be few better literary accounts of office politics, encapsulated in the UK's Bonn embassy, where a combination bureaucratic determinism and internal relationship management wrestle with external imperatives.
As I neared the novel's conclusion, it occurred to me that our present government may be run along very similar lines, and that David Cameron could have found his literary equivalent in le Carre's Bonn embassy head honcho, Bradfield.
The arch political manager, Bradfield makes UK's modus operandi clear to the British spy Turner, who has been despatched by the Foreign Office to find the potential defector:
"I'm a great believer in hypocrisy. It's the nearest we ever get to virtue. It's a statement of what we ought to be like.....I did not contract to serve a powerful nation, least of all a virtuous one. All power corrupts. The loss of power corrupts even more. We thank an American for that advice. It's quite true. We are a corrupt nation and we need all the help we can get."
The alternative interpretation of our current prime minister's pronouncements on a range of issues, including private sector investment in infrastructure, is that he has inherited "delusions of Gordon" , or that he dwells in Cloud-Cuckoo-Land.
Monday, October 29, 2012
"BRITAIN'S BIGGEST ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE - OUR PROPERTY MARKET"
The following views are expressed by John Stepek in today's Money Morning, the daily online newsletter of Money Week magazine.
The Governor "and other members of the Bank of England have warned that the Bank isn’t going to rush into printing more money in November. And it’s not just because of the GDP bounce. It’s because he’s not sure it can solve Britain’s problems.
King reckons – and I wouldn’t disagree – that the basic problem is the banks are still sitting on too much bad debt. The debt needs to be recognised and its value written down (or written off). The banks then need to be patched up. All that needs to happen before banks are willing to lend again.
“In the 1930s, faced with problems of sovereign and other debt similar to those of today, the pretence that debts could be repaid was maintained for far too long. We must not repeat that mistake.”
However, we are repeating it. The trouble is, the “significant writing down of asset values” that King refers to, would involve allowing house prices to fall. In Britain, house prices are the single most important economic indicator, politically speaking. When house prices are falling, governments lose elections.
It’s why public policy, the tax system, and central bank activities, are all horribly skewed towards propping up the property market. Yet with the banks aware that they are over-exposed to an over-valued sector of the economy, they aren’t going to be keen to lend more until the risk is no longer so high.
This unravelling could take a very long time to play out. We can’t expect rampant global growth to help us out. So the Bank of England will continue to have to walk the line between allowing ‘too much’ inflation to get into the system, and keeping rates low enough to cushion those with large debts. That leaves Britain vulnerable to nasty external shocks."
The Governor "and other members of the Bank of England have warned that the Bank isn’t going to rush into printing more money in November. And it’s not just because of the GDP bounce. It’s because he’s not sure it can solve Britain’s problems.
King reckons – and I wouldn’t disagree – that the basic problem is the banks are still sitting on too much bad debt. The debt needs to be recognised and its value written down (or written off). The banks then need to be patched up. All that needs to happen before banks are willing to lend again.
“In the 1930s, faced with problems of sovereign and other debt similar to those of today, the pretence that debts could be repaid was maintained for far too long. We must not repeat that mistake.”
However, we are repeating it. The trouble is, the “significant writing down of asset values” that King refers to, would involve allowing house prices to fall. In Britain, house prices are the single most important economic indicator, politically speaking. When house prices are falling, governments lose elections.
It’s why public policy, the tax system, and central bank activities, are all horribly skewed towards propping up the property market. Yet with the banks aware that they are over-exposed to an over-valued sector of the economy, they aren’t going to be keen to lend more until the risk is no longer so high.
This unravelling could take a very long time to play out. We can’t expect rampant global growth to help us out. So the Bank of England will continue to have to walk the line between allowing ‘too much’ inflation to get into the system, and keeping rates low enough to cushion those with large debts. That leaves Britain vulnerable to nasty external shocks."
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
LEARNING TO DEAL WITH PARALLEL NARRATIVES
As the shadow side of the Jimmy Savile story continues to darken the corridors of power, two programmes on Radio 4 yesterday evening explored the issues of parallel narratives and accepted historical accounts.
The first programme about Peter Rachman discovered that the notorious slum landlord was not so much a manifestation of post-war laissez-faire conservatism as a precursor of the main social policies embraced by New Labour during the first decade of the twenty-first century.
Later, "Analysis" brought a discussion of Education Secretary Michael Gove's support for "Cultural Literacy", or instilling children and young people with a core set of facts to counter-balance the current emphasis on core skills and competences.
However, the case of Savile and, indeed, that of Rachman show that dominant narratives and their apparent facts may later be revealed as incomplete. Michael Gove himself recognises this problem and has suggested that a parallel narratives approach is sometimes needed.
Citing the 1950s Japanese film Rashomon, where four people have different recollections of the same event, the Education Secretary has suggested that this cultural format may throw light on the conflicting stories of former Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell and the Downing Street police officer.
The first programme about Peter Rachman discovered that the notorious slum landlord was not so much a manifestation of post-war laissez-faire conservatism as a precursor of the main social policies embraced by New Labour during the first decade of the twenty-first century.
Later, "Analysis" brought a discussion of Education Secretary Michael Gove's support for "Cultural Literacy", or instilling children and young people with a core set of facts to counter-balance the current emphasis on core skills and competences.
However, the case of Savile and, indeed, that of Rachman show that dominant narratives and their apparent facts may later be revealed as incomplete. Michael Gove himself recognises this problem and has suggested that a parallel narratives approach is sometimes needed.
Citing the 1950s Japanese film Rashomon, where four people have different recollections of the same event, the Education Secretary has suggested that this cultural format may throw light on the conflicting stories of former Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell and the Downing Street police officer.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE BBC? HYSTERIA?
Last year Quentin Letts hosted a rather thought-provoking little series on BBC Radio 4 which asked: "What's the point of...?" various British institutions. The second series was something of a disappointment, possibly due to Corporation dumbing-down. An attempt by Radio 4's "The Moral Maze" to ask the question "what's the point of the BBC?" last week had some interesting contributions and responses from the panel, but the discussion was too short. The role of the BBC, along with other national British institutions, does, however, need to be properly considered, and as a contribution to the - albeit suppressed - national debate, this blog is starting its own series on UK institutions.
I will argue that "Hysteria" is playing an increasingly important role in these institutions, and a desire, conscious or unconscious, to create hysterical responses across the nation to a range of past, present and possible future events. The BBC's response to the crimes of Jimmy Savile is a case in point. Meanwhile, other important news has been sidelined by the Corporation, including its often rather hysterical coverage of events in Europe. This culture of "Institutional Hysteria", as I shall call it, possibly arises from our country having always had a rather incestuous elite, and one increasingly obsessed with money and celebrity. The fact that Savile personified these qualities no doubt goes a long way towards explaining why questions about him may have been raised but were not answered.
I will argue that "Hysteria" is playing an increasingly important role in these institutions, and a desire, conscious or unconscious, to create hysterical responses across the nation to a range of past, present and possible future events. The BBC's response to the crimes of Jimmy Savile is a case in point. Meanwhile, other important news has been sidelined by the Corporation, including its often rather hysterical coverage of events in Europe. This culture of "Institutional Hysteria", as I shall call it, possibly arises from our country having always had a rather incestuous elite, and one increasingly obsessed with money and celebrity. The fact that Savile personified these qualities no doubt goes a long way towards explaining why questions about him may have been raised but were not answered.
Friday, October 12, 2012
THE EUROPE 2020 COMPETITIVENESS REPORT
The World Economic Forum's Europe 2020 Competitiveness Report, published last June, makes for some interesting reading.
Planners and environmentalists should take heart in its advice to the UK, ranked 7th overall but only 12th against green criteria:
"Finally, in order to ensure a more harmonious development process, greater focus should be placed on several dimensions supporting environmental sustainability".
David Cameron and colleagues please take note!
Planners and environmentalists should take heart in its advice to the UK, ranked 7th overall but only 12th against green criteria:
"Finally, in order to ensure a more harmonious development process, greater focus should be placed on several dimensions supporting environmental sustainability".
David Cameron and colleagues please take note!
Tuesday, October 09, 2012
THE PROBLEMS OF BRITISH POWER POLITICS
Several years ago I went to a very good conference on the potential for renewable energy development in Britain. However, whilst broadly sympathetic to renewables, I still had some hard questions to ask, and, because this was a conference for the converted, I felt regarded as the enemy. Fast forward to the present, and I recently attended an equally good economics discussion. On this occasion, it was my use of expressions like environmental advocacy and planning that seemed to cause a noticeable tremor in the room. Nevertheless, the company was rather better tempered.
The major similarity between the two events was a poor understanding of the role of spatial or land use planning, as distinct from Soviet-style centralised economic or energy planning. Now, as someone with an MSc in Urban and Regional Planning Studies conferred by a university economics department, with over twenty five years' experience of spatial planning and project development, I feel reasonably well equipped to explore this important difference. So let me start with land use planning.
In fact, land use planning in the UK - outside Scotland where its strategic importance is still acknowledged - has been largely abandoned in favour of regional spatial strategies (RSS) and local development frameworks. The RSS are also now in the process of abolition. Incidentally, I support the retention of regional planning albeit with a lighter touch. Meanwhile, council-led local planning has become an essentially administrative process, with the hard skills once identified with the land use planner's profession, including architecture, urban design and engineering, largely outsourced to other agencies and, particularly, consultants.
This erosion of planning by successive governments has led to the increasing inability of local plans to fulfil their most important purpose: to direct development to the most appropriate locations relative to its type and scale whilst having regard to existing infrastructure, or probable investment therein, and comprehensive environmental impact assessments. Such direction is, I would argue, especially important for energy planning, and it is the weakness of the spatial planning system and associated environmental regulation in England, most particularly, which has acted to inhibit the development of renewable energy.
To turn now to centralised economic and energy planning, most ordinary people recognise that, notwithstanding the British - or rather English - political penchant for free market rhetoric over the past thirty or so years, this actually disguises an equally strong commitment to central government control, regardless of which parties happen to be in power. The case of nuclear power illustrates this situation very well, for there would be no development of new capacity if this were left to market forces alone. The recent history of nuclear development in the United States shows that strong government financial support is essential.
However, it is not my intention here to consider the pros and cons of different forms of power generation, but to argue that a spatial plan, ideally encompassing the whole of the British Isles and international connectivity, is needed. By such connectivity, I mean a plan which recognises current supply lines and potential future developments, notably international energy super grids. Such a plan would, of course, have to recognise the vital principle of subsidiarity in order to encourage regional and local ingenuity. Similarly, a coherent and long term national regulatory and incentives-based framework would need to be in place to support appropriate investment.
Is an integrated - economic and spatial - planning scenario for energy generation and supply in Britain of the kind I have described a realistic possibility? Perhaps a better question is: can the UK for reasons of economic security as well as environmental sustainability afford not to take this approach? For the "business as usual scenario", where our national politics of power are essentially left to the power politics of day, is no longer viable in an increasingly internationalised energy market where the forces in operation may not always espouse freedom.
The major similarity between the two events was a poor understanding of the role of spatial or land use planning, as distinct from Soviet-style centralised economic or energy planning. Now, as someone with an MSc in Urban and Regional Planning Studies conferred by a university economics department, with over twenty five years' experience of spatial planning and project development, I feel reasonably well equipped to explore this important difference. So let me start with land use planning.
In fact, land use planning in the UK - outside Scotland where its strategic importance is still acknowledged - has been largely abandoned in favour of regional spatial strategies (RSS) and local development frameworks. The RSS are also now in the process of abolition. Incidentally, I support the retention of regional planning albeit with a lighter touch. Meanwhile, council-led local planning has become an essentially administrative process, with the hard skills once identified with the land use planner's profession, including architecture, urban design and engineering, largely outsourced to other agencies and, particularly, consultants.
This erosion of planning by successive governments has led to the increasing inability of local plans to fulfil their most important purpose: to direct development to the most appropriate locations relative to its type and scale whilst having regard to existing infrastructure, or probable investment therein, and comprehensive environmental impact assessments. Such direction is, I would argue, especially important for energy planning, and it is the weakness of the spatial planning system and associated environmental regulation in England, most particularly, which has acted to inhibit the development of renewable energy.
To turn now to centralised economic and energy planning, most ordinary people recognise that, notwithstanding the British - or rather English - political penchant for free market rhetoric over the past thirty or so years, this actually disguises an equally strong commitment to central government control, regardless of which parties happen to be in power. The case of nuclear power illustrates this situation very well, for there would be no development of new capacity if this were left to market forces alone. The recent history of nuclear development in the United States shows that strong government financial support is essential.
However, it is not my intention here to consider the pros and cons of different forms of power generation, but to argue that a spatial plan, ideally encompassing the whole of the British Isles and international connectivity, is needed. By such connectivity, I mean a plan which recognises current supply lines and potential future developments, notably international energy super grids. Such a plan would, of course, have to recognise the vital principle of subsidiarity in order to encourage regional and local ingenuity. Similarly, a coherent and long term national regulatory and incentives-based framework would need to be in place to support appropriate investment.
Is an integrated - economic and spatial - planning scenario for energy generation and supply in Britain of the kind I have described a realistic possibility? Perhaps a better question is: can the UK for reasons of economic security as well as environmental sustainability afford not to take this approach? For the "business as usual scenario", where our national politics of power are essentially left to the power politics of day, is no longer viable in an increasingly internationalised energy market where the forces in operation may not always espouse freedom.
Monday, October 08, 2012
RUSSIFICATION OF EUROPE'S ENERGY POLICY
Whilst the British media celebrated Russian President Vladimir Putin's sixtieth birthday at the weekend - Mr Putin is, after all, something of a celebrity - Russia has today opened a second gas pipeline across the Baltic Sea to Germany. An earlier pipeline began operation last year. Mr Putin announced that the new pipeline would `make a significant contribution to the economic development of our countries and the entire European continent".
Europe obtains some two-fifths of its natural gas supplies from Russia, and the continent's energy demand for gas is forecast to grow some forty percent by 2035. The increasing energy dependence of Europe on Russian gas amounts to the Russification of the region's energy policy, a development no doubt cause for celebration on Mr Putin's birthday.
The increasingly close relationship between Russia and Germany is also noteworthy. In German Chancellor Angela Merkel Vladimir Putin has, to reverse Mrs Thatcher's description of former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, found a woman he can do business with. Mrs Merkel, does after all, share a Soviet hinterland with Mr Putin, who was himself posted to East Germany by the KGB before the collapse of communism.
So as the Conservative Party faithful gather in Birmingham, Prime Minister David Cameron, a onetime recruitment target for the KGB during his student gap year according to his own admission, might want to turn his attention eastwards to Europe. For it is very important that those "Little Englanders" amongst the Tories - the gods bless their souls! - are not permitted to distract the Government's attention from important European questions, including Russification of energy policy.
Europe obtains some two-fifths of its natural gas supplies from Russia, and the continent's energy demand for gas is forecast to grow some forty percent by 2035. The increasing energy dependence of Europe on Russian gas amounts to the Russification of the region's energy policy, a development no doubt cause for celebration on Mr Putin's birthday.
The increasingly close relationship between Russia and Germany is also noteworthy. In German Chancellor Angela Merkel Vladimir Putin has, to reverse Mrs Thatcher's description of former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, found a woman he can do business with. Mrs Merkel, does after all, share a Soviet hinterland with Mr Putin, who was himself posted to East Germany by the KGB before the collapse of communism.
So as the Conservative Party faithful gather in Birmingham, Prime Minister David Cameron, a onetime recruitment target for the KGB during his student gap year according to his own admission, might want to turn his attention eastwards to Europe. For it is very important that those "Little Englanders" amongst the Tories - the gods bless their souls! - are not permitted to distract the Government's attention from important European questions, including Russification of energy policy.
Saturday, October 06, 2012
SOME REFLECTIONS ON THE TURNER PRIZE
As the 2012 Turner Prize show of shortlisted artists opens at Tate Britain this week, I feel it's time to reflect on the role of art in society. So here's my mini-manifesto. Visual art should ideally:
One of my regrets in middle age is that I failed to submit a spoof entry for the Turner Prize, although I did consider applying to the former Channel 4's series "Faking It" as a conceptual artist.
My problem is not so much with the competition itself as the industry which it has spawned, and the pretentious language used by some artists and those who write about them. In short, the Turner Prize has contributed to the commodification of art and its spiritual devaluation.
- be aesthetically pleasing
- challenge our perception
- have a spiritual value
One of my regrets in middle age is that I failed to submit a spoof entry for the Turner Prize, although I did consider applying to the former Channel 4's series "Faking It" as a conceptual artist.
My problem is not so much with the competition itself as the industry which it has spawned, and the pretentious language used by some artists and those who write about them. In short, the Turner Prize has contributed to the commodification of art and its spiritual devaluation.
Friday, October 05, 2012
SHADES OF GREY AND PEOPLE OVER FIFTY
The launch this week of a Labour Party commission, headed by Miriam O'Reilly and Arlene Phillips, into employment age discrimination against women over fifty comes as BBC news presented Fiona Bruce admits to dying her hair to keep her job. Both O'Reilly and Phillips were cast off by the Corporation from their roles in Country File and Strictly Come Dancing in favour of younger women.
As a woman just turned fifty and with her natural hair colour, including some grey, this is an issue close to my heart. However, the Labour Party's apparent championing of it will not make me renew my membership, lapsed since one Tony Blair became leader in the mid-1990s, because Britain's cult of youth, or rather of a youthful appearance, began with New Labour and the so-called Blair Babes.
For although John Major was only a youthful forty seven when he took up prime ministerial office in 1990, he was already grey and - although we did not know this until much later - the erstwhile possessor of a love life with fellow MP Edwina Currie probably closer to Fifty Shades of Grey than anyone in New Labour, with the possible exception of David Blunkett, would be capable of delivering.
Returning to discrimination against mature women the workplace, the issue, it seems to me, is not so much about age as appearance; although there are those for whom an older person's knowledge and experience are unattractive. However, discrimination on grounds of appearance is not confined to older women or men, and beautiful people may be discriminated against as well as plainer types.
The key issue - and apparent reason why BBC Country File sidelined Miriam O'Reilly, but retained the more mature John Craven - is that one's face fits, not just physically (the requirements of high definition television, for instance), but also, and even more importantly in most cases, metaphorically. Yes, it is fitting in with a younger group of colleagues that employers think older women will not do.
This apparent problem is often ascribed to a belief that older and younger women do not "get on" as well as men of different ages, and tend to replicate domestic roles in the workplace. The female menopause is also cited as an actual or potential risk to workplace equilibrium, although this seems to be able to accommodate the male's midlife changes.
Nevertheless, many men over fifty have been known to experience turbulent mood swings, and possibly even hot flushes exacerbated by spicy food, when challenged by younger, and perhaps more virile colleagues, including uniformed police officers. This fact may throw some light on the case of Andrew Mitchell (see below), and remind us all that, in life, there are indeed many shades of grey.
As a woman just turned fifty and with her natural hair colour, including some grey, this is an issue close to my heart. However, the Labour Party's apparent championing of it will not make me renew my membership, lapsed since one Tony Blair became leader in the mid-1990s, because Britain's cult of youth, or rather of a youthful appearance, began with New Labour and the so-called Blair Babes.
For although John Major was only a youthful forty seven when he took up prime ministerial office in 1990, he was already grey and - although we did not know this until much later - the erstwhile possessor of a love life with fellow MP Edwina Currie probably closer to Fifty Shades of Grey than anyone in New Labour, with the possible exception of David Blunkett, would be capable of delivering.
Returning to discrimination against mature women the workplace, the issue, it seems to me, is not so much about age as appearance; although there are those for whom an older person's knowledge and experience are unattractive. However, discrimination on grounds of appearance is not confined to older women or men, and beautiful people may be discriminated against as well as plainer types.
The key issue - and apparent reason why BBC Country File sidelined Miriam O'Reilly, but retained the more mature John Craven - is that one's face fits, not just physically (the requirements of high definition television, for instance), but also, and even more importantly in most cases, metaphorically. Yes, it is fitting in with a younger group of colleagues that employers think older women will not do.
This apparent problem is often ascribed to a belief that older and younger women do not "get on" as well as men of different ages, and tend to replicate domestic roles in the workplace. The female menopause is also cited as an actual or potential risk to workplace equilibrium, although this seems to be able to accommodate the male's midlife changes.
Nevertheless, many men over fifty have been known to experience turbulent mood swings, and possibly even hot flushes exacerbated by spicy food, when challenged by younger, and perhaps more virile colleagues, including uniformed police officers. This fact may throw some light on the case of Andrew Mitchell (see below), and remind us all that, in life, there are indeed many shades of grey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)