A regular visitor to Zelo Street has contacted me to signal his bafflement over Young Dave’s pledge to “recognise marriage within the tax system”, which has caused the Tories some discomfort this week.
The more this move is examined, the more it fails to make sense: Cameron would appeal to no more of the population by pressing on with it, any commitment would come with a cost attached – and a convenient stick for his opponents to beat him with – and it would place those who cohabit but are not married into a “lower division”, along with same sex couples who have entered into Civil Partnerships (which Cameron is said to support).
Unsurprisingly, Tory blogland is not exactly awash with enthusiasm for the proposal, and who wants to even discuss an idea when Party HQ can’t say for certain what it is? Big Al, who would himself be relegated to that “lower division”, will be exploiting this one for a while yet.
Thursday, 7 January 2010
Mind How You Go
Today was one of those rare occasions when I visit the hairdresser. It’s a small shop opposite a tee junction deep in Redbrick Crewe, on a street quiet enough for the snow to have fallen, lain, and then impacted. The side street facing the frontage is slightly downhill as it approaches that tee junction – enough for the icy conditions to spell disaster for anyone driving without brain engaged.
And so it came to pass. As I approached the hairdressers (on foot, mind) I saw a small, moderately customised red hatchback emerging from the side street, shall we say, not under the complete control of its driver. It glided effortlessly sideways until a dull crump signalled significant contact with an unfortunate resident’s parked Fiat Uno.
Basic lessons not heeded: slow right down, use a gear higher than usual to reduce the chance of wheelspin, soft hands on the steering wheel, and maybe leave the car at home if you’re not going far.
I have.
And so it came to pass. As I approached the hairdressers (on foot, mind) I saw a small, moderately customised red hatchback emerging from the side street, shall we say, not under the complete control of its driver. It glided effortlessly sideways until a dull crump signalled significant contact with an unfortunate resident’s parked Fiat Uno.
Basic lessons not heeded: slow right down, use a gear higher than usual to reduce the chance of wheelspin, soft hands on the steering wheel, and maybe leave the car at home if you’re not going far.
I have.
Veep Strong Endorsement
More and more folks in the UK are travelling by rail: the numbers have increased by some 40% recently, to overall levels not seen since nationalisation back in 1948. Some of the growth is where rail can do consistently better on time than an increasingly congested road network, and some is down to the move for greater mobility. And it’s not just a European thing.
Over in the USA, many cities – and even states – have little or no rail service, but in the Washington – New York – New Haven – Boston “Northeast Corridor”, rail is not merely competitive, but strongly so. It’s therefore not a surprise that some in Government use the train to get to and from Washington DC, and perhaps the most prominent right now is Vice President Joe Biden, who reckons to have chalked up seven thousand round trips with Amtrak.
He’s a passionate advocate of rail travel, and he’s right so to be.
Over in the USA, many cities – and even states – have little or no rail service, but in the Washington – New York – New Haven – Boston “Northeast Corridor”, rail is not merely competitive, but strongly so. It’s therefore not a surprise that some in Government use the train to get to and from Washington DC, and perhaps the most prominent right now is Vice President Joe Biden, who reckons to have chalked up seven thousand round trips with Amtrak.
He’s a passionate advocate of rail travel, and he’s right so to be.
Own Goal – 3
Not until after the General Election, then: the latest attempt to unseat Pa Broon appears to have failed to achieve lift off. Some of the statements of support were clearly lukewarm, and one or two missing, but the result is that Brown soldiers on, and “Buff” Hoon is likely to find that, within the Palace of Westminster, he has garnered all the popularity of a turd in a swimming pool.
But, barring a spectacular reversal in popularity, defeat at that election looks certain – unless a number of things happen to turn events to Labour’s advantage. Brown continuing to get the better of Young Dave at PMQs is a minor part of that: more significant would be the ability of Team Brown to expose and rubbish Tory manifesto pledges, and exploit any lack of consistency in their approach – something that Big Al has been banging on about for some time, and he’s back on board.
What could also ride to Labour’s rescue is the economy: if recovery from recession is confirmed for the last quarter of 2009, then swing voters may decide to stick with the devil they know, just as “Basildon Man” did in 1992. Of course, were there a General Election sooner rather than later, there would be little chance of any economic upturn saving Labour – hence Cameron wanting a poll right now.
And finally: the outcome of the General Election is not just about Labour turning events in their favour, but the Tories keeping out of trouble. The forthcoming campaign, with two former red-top journos in the background, is going to be as dirty as any in the past. If anyone has a skeleton in their cupboard, they should leave the stage right now.
But, barring a spectacular reversal in popularity, defeat at that election looks certain – unless a number of things happen to turn events to Labour’s advantage. Brown continuing to get the better of Young Dave at PMQs is a minor part of that: more significant would be the ability of Team Brown to expose and rubbish Tory manifesto pledges, and exploit any lack of consistency in their approach – something that Big Al has been banging on about for some time, and he’s back on board.
What could also ride to Labour’s rescue is the economy: if recovery from recession is confirmed for the last quarter of 2009, then swing voters may decide to stick with the devil they know, just as “Basildon Man” did in 1992. Of course, were there a General Election sooner rather than later, there would be little chance of any economic upturn saving Labour – hence Cameron wanting a poll right now.
And finally: the outcome of the General Election is not just about Labour turning events in their favour, but the Tories keeping out of trouble. The forthcoming campaign, with two former red-top journos in the background, is going to be as dirty as any in the past. If anyone has a skeleton in their cupboard, they should leave the stage right now.
Wednesday, 6 January 2010
Broadsheet Watch – 6
Although I have more time for the Guardian than any other current or former broadsheet paper, that does not mean that I concur with everything that graces its pages. Today has brought an excellent example of this, with a superbly muddle headed denunciation of the railways by Simon Jenkins, who has form in this area.
The main thrust of Jenkins’ article is high speed rail, and the move to map out and then build a new link between London and Scotland. He would rather the cost of such a link be spent instead on the existing network, which would be fine up to a point, and that point is all about capacity. The C-word was the driving force behind the first high speed lines in both France and Spain: the idea that these were vanity projects misses the point.
The existing line between Paris, Dijon and Lyon was, by the 1970s, at capacity: the demand for paths by both passenger and freight trains meant that the former could not be accelerated, not without less of the latter. Thus a new line. Similarly, the main line south from Madrid through Aranjuez was at saturation point: commuter and regional passenger services had to share the same pair of tracks as freight and long distance passenger trains. The new line from Madrid to Sevilla eased the pressure, but the demand is relentless, and more capacity – to remove more or less all long distance passenger trains from the older route – will be needed soon. This will result in new high speed lines to Valencia and Alacant.
Some capacity improvement has been made on the West Coast Main Line (WCML) along its route through the Trent Valley, but ultimately a new line will bring much more of the C-word. This also lies behind the Crossrail project, which Jenkins opposes, saying that the existing Central Line tube is “slightly congested”. Hell’s teeth. He clearly doesn’t have to suffer it in the rush hour. And it’s not just about the City: the health of the West End as a destination is also at stake. As before, there is no capacity in the existing tube service: the Central Line already runs the longest trains on the system, and uses Automatic Train Operation (ATO) through the central area: there is no more improvement possible.
The Jenkins assertion is that high speed rail is for the benefit of the rich, which suggests that he has never sat on a TGV leaving Paris for Lyon, or ridden the AVE out of Madrid Atocha: these trains, as so many others, are used by a broad cross section of their countries’ populations, as are all the other services that can now be fitted in on existing lines, following the overall increase in capacity.
I commend further study of the industry to Simon Jenkins: as with so much that impacts on everyday folk, it does not involve rocket science.
The main thrust of Jenkins’ article is high speed rail, and the move to map out and then build a new link between London and Scotland. He would rather the cost of such a link be spent instead on the existing network, which would be fine up to a point, and that point is all about capacity. The C-word was the driving force behind the first high speed lines in both France and Spain: the idea that these were vanity projects misses the point.
The existing line between Paris, Dijon and Lyon was, by the 1970s, at capacity: the demand for paths by both passenger and freight trains meant that the former could not be accelerated, not without less of the latter. Thus a new line. Similarly, the main line south from Madrid through Aranjuez was at saturation point: commuter and regional passenger services had to share the same pair of tracks as freight and long distance passenger trains. The new line from Madrid to Sevilla eased the pressure, but the demand is relentless, and more capacity – to remove more or less all long distance passenger trains from the older route – will be needed soon. This will result in new high speed lines to Valencia and Alacant.
Some capacity improvement has been made on the West Coast Main Line (WCML) along its route through the Trent Valley, but ultimately a new line will bring much more of the C-word. This also lies behind the Crossrail project, which Jenkins opposes, saying that the existing Central Line tube is “slightly congested”. Hell’s teeth. He clearly doesn’t have to suffer it in the rush hour. And it’s not just about the City: the health of the West End as a destination is also at stake. As before, there is no capacity in the existing tube service: the Central Line already runs the longest trains on the system, and uses Automatic Train Operation (ATO) through the central area: there is no more improvement possible.
The Jenkins assertion is that high speed rail is for the benefit of the rich, which suggests that he has never sat on a TGV leaving Paris for Lyon, or ridden the AVE out of Madrid Atocha: these trains, as so many others, are used by a broad cross section of their countries’ populations, as are all the other services that can now be fitted in on existing lines, following the overall increase in capacity.
I commend further study of the industry to Simon Jenkins: as with so much that impacts on everyday folk, it does not involve rocket science.
Own Goal – 2
By all accounts, Pa Broon was in uncharacteristically good form at Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) today, but most of the attendant hacks were not paying as much attention to the banter between him, Young Dave and Corporal Clegg as they were to the news, first broached by the Guardian at 1157 hours, that there had been a call for a Labour leadership ballot.
What? Here we are, in a General Election year, with the campaign effectively under way – whatever the denials from any of the main parties – and the party of Government becomes embroiled in what will potentially turn off large numbers of voters. Who on earth wants that, apart from anyone who is not in the Labour Party?
Ah well. We need look no further than one of the instigators of the ballot call: step forward Geoff “Buff” Hoon, disaffected former minister, passed over for European Commissioner, and leaving the Commons at the General Election. He is supported by The Usual Suspects: Patricia Hewitt (also failed to get a Euro-berth, and also standing down next time), Charles Clarke, Frank Field, and Barry Sheerman (the Austen Chamberlain of the Labour back benches).
Thus far, anyone else being quoted is backing Brown: Baron Mandelson of Indeterminate Guacamole has cautioned against media overreaction, Hoon has been characterised as “Sideshow Bob”, and Brown confidante “Auguste” Balls has pointed out that Labour has actually had a moderately good week. But still absent from the chorus (1620 hours) are both Milibroons, Jack Straw, Harriet Harman, Alan Johnson, Hilary Benn and of course Alistair Darling. And the Mandelson intervention came not from the good Lord himself, but his spokesman.
But who wants the top job right now? Johnson doesn’t, Straw couldn’t cut it, and I doubt Darling would want to move next door. Hilary Benn, on the other hand, might just: after all, it would put one over on his Dad.
Just a thought.
What? Here we are, in a General Election year, with the campaign effectively under way – whatever the denials from any of the main parties – and the party of Government becomes embroiled in what will potentially turn off large numbers of voters. Who on earth wants that, apart from anyone who is not in the Labour Party?
Ah well. We need look no further than one of the instigators of the ballot call: step forward Geoff “Buff” Hoon, disaffected former minister, passed over for European Commissioner, and leaving the Commons at the General Election. He is supported by The Usual Suspects: Patricia Hewitt (also failed to get a Euro-berth, and also standing down next time), Charles Clarke, Frank Field, and Barry Sheerman (the Austen Chamberlain of the Labour back benches).
Thus far, anyone else being quoted is backing Brown: Baron Mandelson of Indeterminate Guacamole has cautioned against media overreaction, Hoon has been characterised as “Sideshow Bob”, and Brown confidante “Auguste” Balls has pointed out that Labour has actually had a moderately good week. But still absent from the chorus (1620 hours) are both Milibroons, Jack Straw, Harriet Harman, Alan Johnson, Hilary Benn and of course Alistair Darling. And the Mandelson intervention came not from the good Lord himself, but his spokesman.
But who wants the top job right now? Johnson doesn’t, Straw couldn’t cut it, and I doubt Darling would want to move next door. Hilary Benn, on the other hand, might just: after all, it would put one over on his Dad.
Just a thought.
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
Weather Bad Shock Horror
It snowed last night. It then snowed again this morning. However, the sky has not fallen in just yet, and the people of Crewe have been going about their business today without too much difficulty.
But why the snow? Well, it’s January, and if you’re going to get snow in winter, you’re most likely to get it then – it is, after all, the coldest time of the year. Anyone seriously interested in this kind of thing might find the synoptic chart on the Met Office site instructive: the feature to watch is the high pressure area over Greenland and its possible retreat later this week, which might bring change. Then again, if it stays put, its blocking effect stops the usual westerly pattern and locks us in to more north easterlies.
There was the one casualty today: milk running out at Aldi, confirmed as due to the driver being delayed by the snow. Not really worth frightening the public over, mind.
But why the snow? Well, it’s January, and if you’re going to get snow in winter, you’re most likely to get it then – it is, after all, the coldest time of the year. Anyone seriously interested in this kind of thing might find the synoptic chart on the Met Office site instructive: the feature to watch is the high pressure area over Greenland and its possible retreat later this week, which might bring change. Then again, if it stays put, its blocking effect stops the usual westerly pattern and locks us in to more north easterlies.
There was the one casualty today: milk running out at Aldi, confirmed as due to the driver being delayed by the snow. Not really worth frightening the public over, mind.
A Bit More CREAM
News arrives from CREAM, which is campaigning to retain Crewe station in its current location – that is, in Crewe, where it belongs – and against the crackpot idea of moving the station out of town to Basford, just so Network Rail and other participating bodies can make themselves a little pocket money.
The group is now represented on the website of the Campaign for Better Transport, and the entry includes links to useful documents, along with contact details. There will no doubt be a meeting of the group in the near future: this will be signposted on its blog site. If you’re in the area, and would like to support the campaign, all are welcome.
The group is now represented on the website of the Campaign for Better Transport, and the entry includes links to useful documents, along with contact details. There will no doubt be a meeting of the group in the near future: this will be signposted on its blog site. If you’re in the area, and would like to support the campaign, all are welcome.
A Stroll Across The Astroturf – 9
Back from their Christmas and New Year break this week is the so-called Taxpayers’ Alliance, and today they have posted another work of variable accuracy by their so-called “research fellow” Mike Denham (aka Wat Tyler). Mike (or Wat, if you prefer) is now hot on the public sector “paybill”, which, he suggests, is out of control.
Keeping costs under control is no bad thing, and on this point Mike would have my full support. However, his “research”, with the usual “figures”, has one flaw: he’s made it up. Check out the graph headed “Public Sector Paybill as % of GDP” and the sources for the information it contains. These are “HMT PBR (Pre Budget Report), Public Sector FinStats, and BOM Calcs”. The last of these shows that part of the information has been produced by Denham himself: the text directly above the graph concedes that “We estimate that percentage has risen to nearly 12%”.
So the scary bit at the top right of the graph is from the bloke whose purpose, as with the rest of the TPA crew, is making things look as bad as possible, and thereby enabling the demonising of Government. It should therefore be taken with the largest available pinch of salt.
And what about those accounts?
Keeping costs under control is no bad thing, and on this point Mike would have my full support. However, his “research”, with the usual “figures”, has one flaw: he’s made it up. Check out the graph headed “Public Sector Paybill as % of GDP” and the sources for the information it contains. These are “HMT PBR (Pre Budget Report), Public Sector FinStats, and BOM Calcs”. The last of these shows that part of the information has been produced by Denham himself: the text directly above the graph concedes that “We estimate that percentage has risen to nearly 12%”.
So the scary bit at the top right of the graph is from the bloke whose purpose, as with the rest of the TPA crew, is making things look as bad as possible, and thereby enabling the demonising of Government. It should therefore be taken with the largest available pinch of salt.
And what about those accounts?
Broadsheet Watch – 5
Another day, another public body in the crosshairs of the Maily Telegraph: today, their target is the Met Office, and more specifically its chief executive John Hirst, who has received a pay rise of a size which the Maily Telegraph considers inappropriate. The article says that the pay rise comes “despite a series of widely criticised forecasts”, thereby showing that the Telegraph footsoldiers have no sounder grasp of meteorology than their “Comment Star” Christopher Booker, whose cheap attack on the chair of the IPCC I considered recently.
The UK sits on the boundary between a very large expanse of ocean and an equally large continental land mass – added to which is the effect of ocean currents on sea temperature. With this mix of influences, weather forecasting is inevitably a less than totally certain art, and if there is one golden rule to follow, it is that forecasting the weather for more than 24 hours in advance is, more often than not, difficult.
So what use is the Met Office? Well, their computer power enables us to pick out trends in the weather, and gives us the best estimate – perhaps the “best worst” one – of how weather patterns are developing. It gives us better notice of extreme weather events than any number of whingeing hacks can ever do. If it were as bad as is made out, farmers, aviators and sailors would not trust its utterances. That they do should tell us something.
Meanwhile, the Telegraph article goes into Phil Space mode by banging on about low stocks of grit and salt, overrunning engineering works near London’s Liverpool Street terminus, and industrial action on Virgin Trains, as if these are somehow connected to John Hirst’s remuneration. It does manage a quote, but wrongly attributes the usual froth from the so-called Taxpayers’ Alliance to “campaigners”. The TPA is an Astroturf lobby group and should be labelled thus.
The UK sits on the boundary between a very large expanse of ocean and an equally large continental land mass – added to which is the effect of ocean currents on sea temperature. With this mix of influences, weather forecasting is inevitably a less than totally certain art, and if there is one golden rule to follow, it is that forecasting the weather for more than 24 hours in advance is, more often than not, difficult.
So what use is the Met Office? Well, their computer power enables us to pick out trends in the weather, and gives us the best estimate – perhaps the “best worst” one – of how weather patterns are developing. It gives us better notice of extreme weather events than any number of whingeing hacks can ever do. If it were as bad as is made out, farmers, aviators and sailors would not trust its utterances. That they do should tell us something.
Meanwhile, the Telegraph article goes into Phil Space mode by banging on about low stocks of grit and salt, overrunning engineering works near London’s Liverpool Street terminus, and industrial action on Virgin Trains, as if these are somehow connected to John Hirst’s remuneration. It does manage a quote, but wrongly attributes the usual froth from the so-called Taxpayers’ Alliance to “campaigners”. The TPA is an Astroturf lobby group and should be labelled thus.
Monday, 4 January 2010
Panic Stations
As I noted recently, the Bruges Group, which calls itself a “Eurosceptic think tank”, is in reality a repository for screaming Europhobia: its website is littered with articles telling how “Brussels” is going to take away our jobs, our prosperity, and possibly our livelihoods. It will allegedly increase our taxes, impose a terrible burden of regulation, and is part of the great global warming conspiracy.
And for any railway enthusiast, the article that leaps out from that website frontpage is called “On The Wrong Track” by one John Petley. Petley has in the recent past been associated with the UK First Party, a group that has split from UKIP rather in the style of the Judean Popular Peoples’ Front. Ukfp supporters are wont to call UKIP “EUkip” as if they were Europhiles.
His article is shot through with the kind of guff that makes analysis rather like shooting fish in a barrel. He tells us that in the UK, “We ... encouraged competition long before the EU told us to”, except that the EU didn’t “tell” us any such thing. What did come out of the EU was Directive 91/440, which forces running and infrastructure costs to be accounted separately, and thus enables competition to occur.
Petley tells that the EU would prevent a vertically integrated railway system to be adopted in the UK, but this too is bunk. All that is required is that separate accounting, which at present means Network Rail (NR) look after the infrastructure. Over in France, most trains are still run by SNCF, with RFF looking after the tracks, although both are effectively public bodies. We could do the same. End of story.
The rest of the article is similarly shot through with holes, although one stands out: Petley tells that “A European Commission proposal ... which, if implemented, could ... ”, demonstrating an ability to scaremonger that could have come from the Paul Dacre book of hackery.
Otherwise, the usual keywords abound: “regaining control”, “freedom”, and of course the reminder that we gave these rotten garlic crunching foreigners railways, so they should remember who’s the boss. It’s the standard paranoid stuff: the EU is full of folks talking foreign, and the idea that it’s a club where the UK is a prominent member does not enter.
And for any railway enthusiast, the article that leaps out from that website frontpage is called “On The Wrong Track” by one John Petley. Petley has in the recent past been associated with the UK First Party, a group that has split from UKIP rather in the style of the Judean Popular Peoples’ Front. Ukfp supporters are wont to call UKIP “EUkip” as if they were Europhiles.
His article is shot through with the kind of guff that makes analysis rather like shooting fish in a barrel. He tells us that in the UK, “We ... encouraged competition long before the EU told us to”, except that the EU didn’t “tell” us any such thing. What did come out of the EU was Directive 91/440, which forces running and infrastructure costs to be accounted separately, and thus enables competition to occur.
Petley tells that the EU would prevent a vertically integrated railway system to be adopted in the UK, but this too is bunk. All that is required is that separate accounting, which at present means Network Rail (NR) look after the infrastructure. Over in France, most trains are still run by SNCF, with RFF looking after the tracks, although both are effectively public bodies. We could do the same. End of story.
The rest of the article is similarly shot through with holes, although one stands out: Petley tells that “A European Commission proposal ... which, if implemented, could ... ”, demonstrating an ability to scaremonger that could have come from the Paul Dacre book of hackery.
Otherwise, the usual keywords abound: “regaining control”, “freedom”, and of course the reminder that we gave these rotten garlic crunching foreigners railways, so they should remember who’s the boss. It’s the standard paranoid stuff: the EU is full of folks talking foreign, and the idea that it’s a club where the UK is a prominent member does not enter.
Wrong Sort Of Baked Beans – 2
Some time ago, I considered why so many across the political spectrum are so ready to bash the Beeb. Much of the attack comes from Tory supporters, but you don’t need to read more than a few blog posts from Big Al to be reminded that Labour aren’t totally happy either. My conclusion was that both sides want the news served up in a way that suits their taste: this is the Right Sort Of Baked Beans. The Beeb, in its quest to maintain impartiality, serves up the Sort Of Baked Beans that reflects, as far as they can, the Real World.
Thus the dissatisfaction. Since that time, however, we have had the denunciation of the Beeb by Murdoch Junior, together with News International swinging its weight behind the Tories, then Young Dave telling how he’s going to abolish Ofcom (a body which has incurred the Murdochs’ displeasure) and Shadow Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt talking of tearing up the Beeb’s charter.
Consider all of the foregoing as a backdrop to this morning’s Tory press launch (as I mentioned earlier, this is the one with the Big Brother photo of Cameron), when the Beeb’s political editor Nick Robinson, fresh from grilling Alistair Darling at an earlier Labour press briefing, had the temerity to put a question to Young Dave. As the Guardian’s Andrew Sparrow has observed – scroll down to 1055 hours – Cameron replied by telling Robinson that the previous briefing had “indoctrinated” him and that he would have to be “re-educated”.
No doubt Young Dave thought he was being jolly clever, and the presence of a hundred or so Tory supporters chortling in the background will have made him look good, but this comes over as another cheap attempt to paint the Beeb as biased, and could easily rebound: Labour will milk the popularity of the Beeb and any perceived Tory attempt to move against it.
Thus the dissatisfaction. Since that time, however, we have had the denunciation of the Beeb by Murdoch Junior, together with News International swinging its weight behind the Tories, then Young Dave telling how he’s going to abolish Ofcom (a body which has incurred the Murdochs’ displeasure) and Shadow Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt talking of tearing up the Beeb’s charter.
Consider all of the foregoing as a backdrop to this morning’s Tory press launch (as I mentioned earlier, this is the one with the Big Brother photo of Cameron), when the Beeb’s political editor Nick Robinson, fresh from grilling Alistair Darling at an earlier Labour press briefing, had the temerity to put a question to Young Dave. As the Guardian’s Andrew Sparrow has observed – scroll down to 1055 hours – Cameron replied by telling Robinson that the previous briefing had “indoctrinated” him and that he would have to be “re-educated”.
No doubt Young Dave thought he was being jolly clever, and the presence of a hundred or so Tory supporters chortling in the background will have made him look good, but this comes over as another cheap attempt to paint the Beeb as biased, and could easily rebound: Labour will milk the popularity of the Beeb and any perceived Tory attempt to move against it.
Watching Him Watching You
This morning, Young Dave has been giving a press conference, in what is becoming seen as a prelude to a long (overlong?) General Election campaign. Guardian man Andrew Sparrow, who was on duty there, told of the large Cameron face plastered over the wall (scroll down to 1009 hours), but at the time this did not register with me, other than as yet another in what looks like a procession of gimmicks.
Then I saw the poster display. And it says one thing to me: Big Brother. Whoever dreamed this one up was not having a good day at the creativity office. I expect the usual cheerleaders in Tory blogland to gloss over this, or – more likely – not mention it at all, but that will not stop the image circulating, nor alter the fact of the matter: Cameron does not need “ideas” like this.
[UPDATE: Mea Culpa! I should have read more of the Sparrow blog – the Rt Hon Gideon George Oliver Osborne, heir to the Seventeenth Baronet, says the large Cameron face will “appear on a thousand billboards”. So all that Labour need is enough activists, equipped with spray paint, to add an appropriate “Big Brother” slogan. Michael Ashcroft will be demanding his money back]
Then I saw the poster display. And it says one thing to me: Big Brother. Whoever dreamed this one up was not having a good day at the creativity office. I expect the usual cheerleaders in Tory blogland to gloss over this, or – more likely – not mention it at all, but that will not stop the image circulating, nor alter the fact of the matter: Cameron does not need “ideas” like this.
[UPDATE: Mea Culpa! I should have read more of the Sparrow blog – the Rt Hon Gideon George Oliver Osborne, heir to the Seventeenth Baronet, says the large Cameron face will “appear on a thousand billboards”. So all that Labour need is enough activists, equipped with spray paint, to add an appropriate “Big Brother” slogan. Michael Ashcroft will be demanding his money back]
How Tired Is Your Pilot? – 6
Back in the news today is Ryanair, the Millwall of air carriers (everybody hates us and we don’t care), who have been called out by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) for their frankly larcenous approach to debit card transactions – well, the vast majority of them, anyway. The OFT have estimated that a debit card payment costs “significantly less” than a quid to process: Ryanair charge five pounds per sector per passenger, unless you carry a pre-pay card.
Thus, had I chosen Ryanair for my trip to Prague last June (the charge for debit cards put me off and led me to find that BMIBaby were cheaper for the same sector), the carrier would have made over nine pounds’ worth of extra profit. For a family of four, on one booking, they would have made another 39 notes.
Meanwhile, the flip side of Ryanair’s money generating activities – keeping down costs – has been laid bare on the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) website: the “Bulletin Reports” for December includes a potentially deadly incident at Stansted back in late 2008. As ever, the AAIB do not identify the carrier concerned, but the Irish registration mark, together with the location and aircraft type (Boeing 737-800) leave little doubt. Moreover, the full report includes at Figure 3 a photo which shows clearly the Ryanair logo and livery.
The incident, while attributable to both flight deck and ground handling, points up the pressure on Ryanair crews: the flight was running late, and the aircraft was carrying a defect – the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) was not working – so engine start was initially from a ground air supply. The flight deck should not have attempted what is known as a crossbleed start of the second engine – using the already started engine to provide start pressure – without the park brake applied. That they did suggests corner cutting to save time.
And finally, consider the number of hours flown by the flight commander in the past 90 days: if the total for the last 28 days, at 23 hours, is correct, that means that in the 62 days beforehand, he flew a total of 247 hours. Most carriers work to a maximum of 80 per 28 days, with an absolute maximum of 100. If I were at the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA), I’d be asking Mr O’Leary and his pals just how their crews are putting in such heroic numbers of hours – or being caused so to do.
Thus, had I chosen Ryanair for my trip to Prague last June (the charge for debit cards put me off and led me to find that BMIBaby were cheaper for the same sector), the carrier would have made over nine pounds’ worth of extra profit. For a family of four, on one booking, they would have made another 39 notes.
Meanwhile, the flip side of Ryanair’s money generating activities – keeping down costs – has been laid bare on the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) website: the “Bulletin Reports” for December includes a potentially deadly incident at Stansted back in late 2008. As ever, the AAIB do not identify the carrier concerned, but the Irish registration mark, together with the location and aircraft type (Boeing 737-800) leave little doubt. Moreover, the full report includes at Figure 3 a photo which shows clearly the Ryanair logo and livery.
The incident, while attributable to both flight deck and ground handling, points up the pressure on Ryanair crews: the flight was running late, and the aircraft was carrying a defect – the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) was not working – so engine start was initially from a ground air supply. The flight deck should not have attempted what is known as a crossbleed start of the second engine – using the already started engine to provide start pressure – without the park brake applied. That they did suggests corner cutting to save time.
And finally, consider the number of hours flown by the flight commander in the past 90 days: if the total for the last 28 days, at 23 hours, is correct, that means that in the 62 days beforehand, he flew a total of 247 hours. Most carriers work to a maximum of 80 per 28 days, with an absolute maximum of 100. If I were at the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA), I’d be asking Mr O’Leary and his pals just how their crews are putting in such heroic numbers of hours – or being caused so to do.
Sunday, 3 January 2010
Broadsheet Watch – 4
Many years ago, the Times and Sunday Times were owned by Lord Thomson, and were both renowned for the quality of their journalism. Then, after a wearying battle with organised labour, Thomson sold the titles in 1981 to Rupert Murdoch, and the pressure on journalists to do more with less resource started in earnest. Nowadays, it is not hard to point up poor and slanted journalism in the Sunday Times, and today’s edition has a superb example.
Rupe’s supposedly upmarket troops are clearly under instruction to lay into the public sector: today’s article tells of this area having enjoyed a “golden age” under Labour, which of course is not the party that Rupe wants in power, hence the knocking copy. It links to other articles, one of which is prejudicially titled “The public sector starts at Number 1 Easy Street”, clearly meant to suggest that those so employed are enjoying a cushy lifestyle, while providing no evidence to support the contention.
Public sector workers are held, in today’s article, to be getting “bigger pay rises”, yet not one example is given. The average pay of public sector workers is compared with those in the private sector, but no comparison is made between similar jobs in the two sectors. Whether the figures are influenced by the public sector outsourcing low paid jobs is not even considered.
Pensions are, as ever, a favoured target, so the article compares some civil service pensions with some private sector ones, but fails to make the point that those employed in local government are not civil servants. Retirement ages are then covered, with one example given being local government workers – so the article is cherry picking: civil servants when it wants to talk pensions, then local government workers on retirement.
And only well into the article is the fact conceded that police officers are part of that public sector. Firefighters and soldiers – the latter, as ever, a body that the Murdoch press claims to champion – are not mentioned. Neither are all the front line staff who work in the NHS, including all those junior doctors that the press got so worked up about not long ago. As for the air traffic controllers who keep our skies safe – well, that’s apparently beyond Rupe and his upmarket troops.
Meanwhile, no justification is mustered for the headline: “Public sector pay races ahead in recession”. Attaboy Rupe – just keep making it up.
Rupe’s supposedly upmarket troops are clearly under instruction to lay into the public sector: today’s article tells of this area having enjoyed a “golden age” under Labour, which of course is not the party that Rupe wants in power, hence the knocking copy. It links to other articles, one of which is prejudicially titled “The public sector starts at Number 1 Easy Street”, clearly meant to suggest that those so employed are enjoying a cushy lifestyle, while providing no evidence to support the contention.
Public sector workers are held, in today’s article, to be getting “bigger pay rises”, yet not one example is given. The average pay of public sector workers is compared with those in the private sector, but no comparison is made between similar jobs in the two sectors. Whether the figures are influenced by the public sector outsourcing low paid jobs is not even considered.
Pensions are, as ever, a favoured target, so the article compares some civil service pensions with some private sector ones, but fails to make the point that those employed in local government are not civil servants. Retirement ages are then covered, with one example given being local government workers – so the article is cherry picking: civil servants when it wants to talk pensions, then local government workers on retirement.
And only well into the article is the fact conceded that police officers are part of that public sector. Firefighters and soldiers – the latter, as ever, a body that the Murdoch press claims to champion – are not mentioned. Neither are all the front line staff who work in the NHS, including all those junior doctors that the press got so worked up about not long ago. As for the air traffic controllers who keep our skies safe – well, that’s apparently beyond Rupe and his upmarket troops.
Meanwhile, no justification is mustered for the headline: “Public sector pay races ahead in recession”. Attaboy Rupe – just keep making it up.
Selective Memories
During the party conference season, the leaders of all the main parties gave interviews to Andrew Marr, and the one that generated most comment – not unconnected to the question Marr pitched on medication – was that with Pa Broon. One commentator from the Tory cheerleader side of the blogosphere even made this memorable comment at the end of his post on the subject:
“What's the betting Brown refuses to be interviewed by him again?”
which, as today’s appearance by Brown on the Marr show demonstrates, would not have been a particularly fruitful strategy. The same commentator has just posted his observations on that latest interview – which, of course, hold that Brown is rubbish, because, well, he is – but seems to have forgotten his quote.
Back with that interview, the selective memory attack seems to have extended to Brown himself, who had all sorts of hopeful noises to make on how the UK might lead the world in a variety of new and emerging technologies, but was not convincing on how these might improve our ability to reduce the country’s stock of debt over time. Nor is this area – the sharp deindustrialisation of the UK began rather earlier than the accession of the New Labour project, in Margaret Thatcher’s day – one where either main party has covered itself in glory.
But one area where Brown did signpost something new was in soundbites – which shows how thin the brew of this discussion really was. His thrust was that what he was doing was for the good not merely of the Labour Party, but that of the country. I mention this not because of any sudden attachment to extreme cheesiness (fat chance) but because this sounds as if it may be said again and again in the forthcoming General Election campaign.
So brace yourselves – that will be difficult for anyone to selectively edit out.
“What's the betting Brown refuses to be interviewed by him again?”
which, as today’s appearance by Brown on the Marr show demonstrates, would not have been a particularly fruitful strategy. The same commentator has just posted his observations on that latest interview – which, of course, hold that Brown is rubbish, because, well, he is – but seems to have forgotten his quote.
Back with that interview, the selective memory attack seems to have extended to Brown himself, who had all sorts of hopeful noises to make on how the UK might lead the world in a variety of new and emerging technologies, but was not convincing on how these might improve our ability to reduce the country’s stock of debt over time. Nor is this area – the sharp deindustrialisation of the UK began rather earlier than the accession of the New Labour project, in Margaret Thatcher’s day – one where either main party has covered itself in glory.
But one area where Brown did signpost something new was in soundbites – which shows how thin the brew of this discussion really was. His thrust was that what he was doing was for the good not merely of the Labour Party, but that of the country. I mention this not because of any sudden attachment to extreme cheesiness (fat chance) but because this sounds as if it may be said again and again in the forthcoming General Election campaign.
So brace yourselves – that will be difficult for anyone to selectively edit out.
Friday, 1 January 2010
Broadsheet Watch – 3
We know where the Daily Mail stands on the issue of the EU – the latter organisation is held to be A Bad Thing. Just consider all that bureaucracy (unelected, remember), banana straightening, sausage outlawing, directive imposing, tax grabbing, and anything else the hacks can dream up when they’re not otherwise employed. The Telegraph has always been Eurosceptic, but now the Mail influence has brought a triumphant meeting of prejudice with supposed authority.
The new style can be seen at work in this article from last Wednesday. At first this appears to be a serious analysis of the outlook for Eurozone countries, but an early indication of writing to order (or perhaps that should be writing to agenda) appears in the first paragraph, where we are told of the M3 money supply figure. Ring any bells? M3 was the target indicator for money supply in the early years of Margaret Thatcher’s administration, until its inability to read from the right script led to its being dropped.
But the situation in the Eurozone must be bad, as the Telegraph has on record no mere pundit, but a real professor. Tim Congdon is the Prof., and he’s from International Monetary Research, which sounds very grand until you realise it has nothing to do with the similarly titled IMF. But what are its leanings? Scroll down to the bottom of the page and check out the one and only link: the Bruges Group, a supposedly Eurosceptic body, but in reality (check out the front page link on the railways, a fact free tirade which I’ll return to later) directly Europhobic: one of its former leading lights went on to found UKIP.
And the motivation behind the Telegraph article can be found in its last line, quoting Congdon once more: “Fractures in the Euro system are becoming clearer by the day”. So there it is: Europhobic knocking copy masquerading as learned opinion. Thus the meeting of minds between Mail and Telegraph – somewhere off Fantasy Island.
The new style can be seen at work in this article from last Wednesday. At first this appears to be a serious analysis of the outlook for Eurozone countries, but an early indication of writing to order (or perhaps that should be writing to agenda) appears in the first paragraph, where we are told of the M3 money supply figure. Ring any bells? M3 was the target indicator for money supply in the early years of Margaret Thatcher’s administration, until its inability to read from the right script led to its being dropped.
But the situation in the Eurozone must be bad, as the Telegraph has on record no mere pundit, but a real professor. Tim Congdon is the Prof., and he’s from International Monetary Research, which sounds very grand until you realise it has nothing to do with the similarly titled IMF. But what are its leanings? Scroll down to the bottom of the page and check out the one and only link: the Bruges Group, a supposedly Eurosceptic body, but in reality (check out the front page link on the railways, a fact free tirade which I’ll return to later) directly Europhobic: one of its former leading lights went on to found UKIP.
And the motivation behind the Telegraph article can be found in its last line, quoting Congdon once more: “Fractures in the Euro system are becoming clearer by the day”. So there it is: Europhobic knocking copy masquerading as learned opinion. Thus the meeting of minds between Mail and Telegraph – somewhere off Fantasy Island.
Broadsheet Watch – 2
Anyone wondering how the Maily Telegraph earned its nickname need look no further than the paper’s post Christmas exposé on the alleged costs of protecting former PM Tony Blair. The headline – Tony Blair costs British taxpayers six million a year to protect – sounds like an open and shut case.
However, look beyond the headline and things are less clear cut. We are told that “The former PM is understood to be the most expensive person in the country for the police to guard” (note the less than assertive language), and that “More than 20 officers are now understood to be assigned to protecting Mr Blair” (also less than assertive). We are then told that “It is feared that Mr Blair’s security will become even more costly next year”, introducing, yes, fear. But very little in the way of those pesky things called facts.
And what is the source for the story? As with the Daily Mail, you don’t need to know such things, beyond “Whitehall insiders”, “Whitehall sources”, or the impressive sounding “senior Whitehall source”. These could, of course, be significant sources, but then again, they could just as easily be cleaners and their supervisors (the latter allowing the use of the term “senior”).
The “senior Whitehall source” introduces another Mail staple: Blair’s “private assignments” are not just private assignments, but they are “well paid”. That’s right, he’s getting more than you, and you have to feel envious. This is the way as taught by the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre, and now it is the way of the Telegraph. In case you aren’t feeling envious enough, the article tells of protecting not just the Blair house, but his “four million pound London home” (getting a house price reference into the article is classic Mail). Again, he’s getting more than you – feel the envy!
And he’s getting more than the current PM – well, perhaps: the article tells that “It is thought that Gordon Brown only has a team of about ten close protection officers”. Hell’s teeth. “It is thought that ... about ten”? Nothing like being bold, assertive and accurate, is there? Again, as with the Daily Mail, you can always make it up as you go along – just make sure the caveats cover your backside.
However, look beyond the headline and things are less clear cut. We are told that “The former PM is understood to be the most expensive person in the country for the police to guard” (note the less than assertive language), and that “More than 20 officers are now understood to be assigned to protecting Mr Blair” (also less than assertive). We are then told that “It is feared that Mr Blair’s security will become even more costly next year”, introducing, yes, fear. But very little in the way of those pesky things called facts.
And what is the source for the story? As with the Daily Mail, you don’t need to know such things, beyond “Whitehall insiders”, “Whitehall sources”, or the impressive sounding “senior Whitehall source”. These could, of course, be significant sources, but then again, they could just as easily be cleaners and their supervisors (the latter allowing the use of the term “senior”).
The “senior Whitehall source” introduces another Mail staple: Blair’s “private assignments” are not just private assignments, but they are “well paid”. That’s right, he’s getting more than you, and you have to feel envious. This is the way as taught by the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre, and now it is the way of the Telegraph. In case you aren’t feeling envious enough, the article tells of protecting not just the Blair house, but his “four million pound London home” (getting a house price reference into the article is classic Mail). Again, he’s getting more than you – feel the envy!
And he’s getting more than the current PM – well, perhaps: the article tells that “It is thought that Gordon Brown only has a team of about ten close protection officers”. Hell’s teeth. “It is thought that ... about ten”? Nothing like being bold, assertive and accurate, is there? Again, as with the Daily Mail, you can always make it up as you go along – just make sure the caveats cover your backside.
A Stroll Across The Astroturf – 8
As the Charity Commission opens a regulatory compliance case into the affairs of the Politics and Economics Research Trust – the supposedly charitable arm of the so-called Taxpayers’ Alliance – another piece of “research” has been published by the TPA’s so-called “research fellow” Mike Denham (aka Wat Tyler, as I’ve noted previously). Denham, not for the first time, raises the spectre of debt, but unfortunately for him and the TPA, also talks industrial strength drivel on the subject.
He focuses on the problems faced by Greece, which I’ve covered before. And here we are told that the Euro – the currency used throughout the country – is “effectively a foreign currency”. It is? Well, Mike Denham says so – and he also says that it’s controlled by “the Franco-German alliance”. Wow. Perhaps he’d like to tell the Governments of Ireland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, Cyprus, Slovenia, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Finland, Malta and Slovakia of his discovery – or just stop talking such drivel. The central banks of all Eurozone countries participate in managing the currency.
But the discussion of the Greek problem is only a foretaste for Denham’s main thrust: the foreign currency liabilities of the UK banking system. As usual with TPA “research”, there has to be a graph, because, well, TPA “research” has lots of “figures” to make it look authoritative. And Mike has a really big scary number to bring to our attention: 4.2 trillion quid. He suggests that the banks’ collateral for this debt might not be all that sound, but – surprise, surprise – brings forward no evidence whatever in support.
So we have to take him at his word, and as he can’t even describe the management of the Euro correctly, that’s not likely to happen. With this level of accuracy, Denham may be even closer to junk status than Greece. Is he being paid for this? Hey, I’ve just figured out a way to cut waste – something the TPA can look at while they wait for their accounts to finally see the light of day.
He focuses on the problems faced by Greece, which I’ve covered before. And here we are told that the Euro – the currency used throughout the country – is “effectively a foreign currency”. It is? Well, Mike Denham says so – and he also says that it’s controlled by “the Franco-German alliance”. Wow. Perhaps he’d like to tell the Governments of Ireland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, Cyprus, Slovenia, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Finland, Malta and Slovakia of his discovery – or just stop talking such drivel. The central banks of all Eurozone countries participate in managing the currency.
But the discussion of the Greek problem is only a foretaste for Denham’s main thrust: the foreign currency liabilities of the UK banking system. As usual with TPA “research”, there has to be a graph, because, well, TPA “research” has lots of “figures” to make it look authoritative. And Mike has a really big scary number to bring to our attention: 4.2 trillion quid. He suggests that the banks’ collateral for this debt might not be all that sound, but – surprise, surprise – brings forward no evidence whatever in support.
So we have to take him at his word, and as he can’t even describe the management of the Euro correctly, that’s not likely to happen. With this level of accuracy, Denham may be even closer to junk status than Greece. Is he being paid for this? Hey, I’ve just figured out a way to cut waste – something the TPA can look at while they wait for their accounts to finally see the light of day.
Broadsheet Watch – 1
The average hack – even in supposedly upmarket papers – cannot be expected to command an in depth knowledge of climate change science. Thus it is refreshing to see the Maily Telegraph’s Christopher Booker not so trying: instead, he is attempting to discredit climate change by smearing reputations, notably that of IPCC Chair and Nobel laureate Rajendra Pachauri. Booker’s latest hatchet job appeared in the paper’s Boxing Day edition.
Unfortunately, Booker displays an elementary failure to distinguish between weather patterns and long term climate change: he starts his article by telling of “Blizzards sweeping across Europe”, thus pitching his attack at the same level as Sean Hannity, “star” of Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse) who asserted that climate change wasn’t happening because “it snowed yesterday in Houston”.
As I’ve posted previously, anyone with a basic grasp of meteorology will know that an established north easterly airflow at the coldest time of the year will produce very cold weather across the UK. But this does not detain Booker: he then asserts that “the northern hemisphere was plunged into its third freezing winter in succession”. Sounds dramatic, you might think. It’s also at variance with those inconvenient things called facts.
A look at Met Office figures shows that the winter of 2008-9 was indeed colder than average: it was the coldest for a decade across the UK. However, the winter of 2007-8 was much milder than average, thus debunking Booker’s claim. Moreover, the winter of 2009-10 isn’t over yet, so we don’t know whether it will go down as an especially harsh one.
So to sum up: Christopher Booker can’t tell global warming from transient weather patterns, can’t stand up his assertions, and wants his audience to believe that climate change isn’t happening because he doesn’t like the cut of the IPCC chair’s jib.
There’s quality journalism for you.
Unfortunately, Booker displays an elementary failure to distinguish between weather patterns and long term climate change: he starts his article by telling of “Blizzards sweeping across Europe”, thus pitching his attack at the same level as Sean Hannity, “star” of Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse) who asserted that climate change wasn’t happening because “it snowed yesterday in Houston”.
As I’ve posted previously, anyone with a basic grasp of meteorology will know that an established north easterly airflow at the coldest time of the year will produce very cold weather across the UK. But this does not detain Booker: he then asserts that “the northern hemisphere was plunged into its third freezing winter in succession”. Sounds dramatic, you might think. It’s also at variance with those inconvenient things called facts.
A look at Met Office figures shows that the winter of 2008-9 was indeed colder than average: it was the coldest for a decade across the UK. However, the winter of 2007-8 was much milder than average, thus debunking Booker’s claim. Moreover, the winter of 2009-10 isn’t over yet, so we don’t know whether it will go down as an especially harsh one.
So to sum up: Christopher Booker can’t tell global warming from transient weather patterns, can’t stand up his assertions, and wants his audience to believe that climate change isn’t happening because he doesn’t like the cut of the IPCC chair’s jib.
There’s quality journalism for you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
