Thursday 30 September 2010

THE MILLIBANDS

Britain's Labour Party elected a new leader while I was in England. After a complicated four rounds of voting, younger brother Ed Milliband (ex-Climate Change and Energy Secretary) finally beat elder brother David Milliband (ex-Foreign Secretary) by 50% and a bit to 50% less a bit. David was the favourite, and was ahead during the first three rounds (when the other three candidates dropped out one by one). In Labour's quirky electoral college, he also won the support of the majority of MP's and the majority of party members. However, Ed's support in the third section, the trade unions and other affiliated bodies, was just enough to tip the balance when it mattered, allowing him to squeak home in the final round of voting.

As a political contest, I thought that it was a yawn, despite the fact that the new leader has a fair chance of becoming the country's next Prime Minister (particularly if the coalition's forthcoming cuts make it desperately unpopular). Not only had it been going on since just after the Election, when Gordon Brown resigned as leader, but four of the five candidates were nearly identical Oxbridge-educated career politicians (the fifth, Diane Abbott, was black, left-wing and a woman, a combination which duly doomed her to first round oblivion). I am sure I am being unfair to someone, somewhere when I say this; but I suspect it is probably what most voters felt as well.

As an exercise in family psychology, on the other hand, it was riveting. What ambitious sibling wants to take on their other ambitious sibling in a winner-takes-all contest, in which the only certainty is that at least one of them will lose? When it was all over, there was lots of "I love my brother, he's a wonderful guy" stuff. But David Milliband's smile looked decidedly tight, and his decision not to seek a post in Ed's Shadow Cabinet showed that brotherly loyalty has its limits. Christmas dinner with mum is unlikely to be as jovial this year as it has been in the past.

Walter Blotscher

Wednesday 29 September 2010

LONDON'S RAILWAY TERMINI

You get no Brownie points for being a pioneer. Britain's early industrial revolution and the rapid expansion of the railways in the laissez faire 19th century resulted in about a dozen separate mainline railway stations in London, more than any other capital city. But the combination of three different and largely incompatible power sources (diesel, overhead electric and third rail) and a lack of connections between stations led to two unwelcome consequences. First, it allowed for a huge increase in commuters into London (commuters are difficult for railways to manage, since they require large amounts of rolling stock which are idle for most of the day, sophisticated signalling systems, which are similarly underutilised, and complex manning rosters). Secondly, however, passengers wishing to go through London had to disembark into a taxi or onto the Underground, and then reimbark at another station before continuing their journey. My brother worked for the railways for all of his working life, and once told me that he reckoned the London "bottleneck" represented 80% of the company's national operational problems.

From the Second World War until the end of the 1980's, it was physically impossible to cross London without changing trains; in contrast to (say) Paris, with its RER crosstown connections. In 1989, the reopening of the Snow Hill tunnel between Farringdon and what is now City Thameslink, disused since 1916, allowed through services from Bedford and Luton in the north to Brighton in the south. This was later joined by the reintroduction of passenger services on the West London line north-south from Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction. But it is still impossible to go east-west. The Crossrail project, connecting Paddington and the west (including Heathrow Airport) to Liverpool Street and the east via Bond Street and Tottenham Court Road, has been on the drawing board for decades, and finally got started last year, with a projected operating date of 2017. However, with a lot of brand new tunnelling under one of the world's busiest town centres, it is expensive; it will be interesting to see if it survives the draconian cuts in public services that the coalition Government will be introducing in a month or so.

In general, I don't think that the U.K. does big transport infrastructure projects very well. The planning system is unwieldy, public money scarce, the NIMBY (not in my back yard) mentality large. Until not so long ago, the only way to get to Heathrow, the world's busiest international airport, was on the trundly Piccadilly line; contrast that with the international train services from Schiphol or Frankfurt directly underneath the arrivals terminal. Even now, you can only go from Heathrow to Paddington, where you again face the disconnection point outlined above.

Against that background, it is perhaps surprising that a fair proportion of the capital's railway stations have in fact managed to get modernised in recent years. St. Pancras, now the home of the Eurostar trains to the continent, looks stunning, and will look even better once the architecturally fantastic Victorian hotel reopens. Liverpool Street in the City has also been given a major improvement, and even Charing Cross and Victoria look perkier. The services out of them are not necessarily brilliant - they are certainly expensive - but at least you get to wait in more congenial surroundings.

The other problem with London is on the freight side. In a world conscious of climate change, there is much to be said for direct freight trains from the continent, with one large engine replacing lots of smaller lorries. However, even if the bottleneck around London is slightly easier for freight than for passengers, there is still the problem of continental loading gauges. Track sizes are the same, but the majority of Britain's railways use narrower loading gauges, meaning that the wider continental freight trains can't pass through the tunnels and under the bridges. The only big railway line built to continental loading gauge standards was the Great Central from Manchester to London Marylebone via Sheffield, Nottingham and Leicester. Unfortunately, that was the only major line axed under Beeching in the 1960's; just the commuter trains at the southern end survive.

I used to know a guy at University who was a bit of a railway nut. He had this great idea for reopening the Great Central, much of whose basic infrastructure remains intact, and linking a big new freight depot in the Midlands directly with Milan or Dortmund. There would be some fiddling around London, and some bridge and tunnel widening on the way to Dover; but it could be done relatively cheaply, certainly for less than a new line. And lorry traffic between the channel ports and Scotland, Ireland, the north of England and the Midlands would be drastically reduced, cutting both congestion in the south and overall emissions. He was working on it during the 1980's and he was working on it when he unexpectedly died in 2004. The ideas are still around, but they are also still pretty much on the drawing board. As I say, the U.K. doesn't do big transport infrastructure projects very well.

Walter Blotscher

Tuesday 28 September 2010

STANSTED AIRPORT (2)

Much to my surprise, I managed this morning to go through Stansted Airport, from rental car drop-off to check-in, security, transit shuttle and finally gate, in about 14 minutes flat. That was undoubtedly efficient and almost pleasurable.

It is still a butt ugly airport, though. And the security people still chat all the time. And there was no coffee shop in my gate area. And no Times newspaper in W.H.Smith's. You get the point; I am not a fan.

Still, every cloud has its silver lining. When I got home and inspected my mole traps, I found two dead moles, one in each trap. Puffed up with martial pride, I then went off to play bridge, and promptly bid and made 6 hearts doubled with only 9 high card points in my hand. Now that doesn't happen very often.

Walter Blotscher

Monday 20 September 2010

THE POPE'S VISIT

Here in England, I got caught up in the tail-end of the Pope's visit to the U.K., which finished last night. First, because a large part of Central London got cordoned off on Saturday, when I arrived, because of the open-air event in Hyde Park. Secondly, because he stayed at the Papal Nuncio's residence in Wimbledon, close to where I was staying. My friends have young children, who got very excited yesterday morning when the Pope flew off to Birmingham in a helicopter, which had landed for him in Wimbledon Park. The whole park was cordoned off by police, while around half a dozen helicopters put up a tremendous din before flying away with the Pope inside.

Judging from the visit, Britain's relationship with the head of the catholic church seems to have mellowed. Following the Reformation, catholics were at first persecuted, and then merely positively discriminated against. Modern attempts at reconciliation between Anglicanism and Catholicism then foundered on social matters such as contraception, the role of women in the church, and (most recently) sexual abuse by priests. In contrast to his Polish predecessor, who last visited in 1982, Pope Benedict was portrayed as a cold, hardline German out of touch with the modern world. Despite the fact that this was a State Visit (as opposed to the 1982 visit, which the Pope made in order to talk to his own flock), the omens were not good.

Yet it all seems to have gone rather well. Benedict made strong statements condemning sexual abuse by priests, and met some of the victims. He reminded anglicans of their shared, common Christian heritage. He stood up for proponents of faith - all faiths, catholic, anglican and muslim - against those striving for a secular, materialist world. His softly accented English charmed listeners. All in all, he came across as a benevolent grandfather rather than a teutonic bogeyman.

Nothing represented the change more than the service in Birmingham, which was held to beatify Cardinal Newman, the 19th century Oxford anglican theologian, who converted to catholicism and was made a cardinal. If this had happened in the 19th century, then it would have aroused widespread hostility, perhaps worse; today it all seems perfectly natural. In that sense, Britain has indeed moved on.

Walter Blotscher

Saturday 18 September 2010

STANSTED AIRPORT

I am off to visit my mum in England today. Since I won't have my computer with me, that may mean no blogging for the next 10 days; though I will try to get online from someone else's.

The best way for me to get to the U.K. is from Billund to Stansted with Ryanair. Ryanair are great; not luxurious, but you gets what you pays for. And they have certainly opened up Scandinavia to air traffic. When I first met my wife in 1985, I remember flying from Southend to Billund in a tiny little plane, and the ticket costing about £500 return. My ticket today, in a much bigger plane, cost precisely Dk471 return, about £55. As a consumer, I can't complain about that trend.

Stansted Airport, on the other hand, is something else. I hate it. Despite its being designed by Norman Foster, the terminal building is ugly. The rail links, when compared with (say) Frankfurt or Amsterdam, are next to useless, the Stansted Express is dirty and expensive (it costs almost as much to go from Stansted to Central London as from Stansted to Denmark). I try to imagine the impressions of a foreigner coming to the U.K. for the first time, and think they would not be good; unlike in other countries in the Schengen arrangement, there are lots of posters about the draconian things that will happen to you if you don't have the right documents. Hardly a welcome mat.

The worst thing for me is when you fly out from the airport. Endless queues for both check-in and security. And have you noticed how the security personnel chat to each other constantly while they are impounding your toothpaste, or making you take your shoes and belt off, or the other ridiculous things they do? How can you catch a terrorist if you're reminiscing with your workmates about your booze-up in Bishop's Stortford the night before?

Still, things could be worse. At least I don't have to fly into Heathrow. A cardinal in the Pope's entourage likened it this week to arriving in a third world country. He spoke the truth. But since the Pope was about to embark on a state visit, the cardinal judiciously decided to stay away. Truth hurts.

Walter Blotscher

Friday 17 September 2010

THOSE MYTHICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS .....

On 1 January 2007, the map of Denmark was redrawn. Before that date there had been 271 local authorities ("kommuner") and 14 regions ("amter"); after that date there were 98 kommuner and 5 regions. All of the bodies were, and still are, run by elected politicians.

In a country of only 5.5 million people, some of the former kommuner were quite small (in olden times, prior to the merger in 1970 of the 1,300 parishes into kommuner, they could be tiny). The former kommune where I live had about 5,000 people, 3,000 in the main town and the rest scattered in the countryside round about. The arrangement was very small-town and folksy. The kommune ran the one secondary school, the three junior village schools, and the old people's homes, and organised rubbish collection. The mayor doubled as a local estate agent, though he was paid a salary for his political work. Despite being a foreigner and recent immigrant, I personally knew three or four of the 13-man council, and a number of the officials. It was easy to get a tax rebate or a building permit sorted out. Yet unlike, say, in the U.K., the council also had the power to set income tax rates, and property taxes, so that the tax burden in Denmark can and does vary by a percentage point or two or three, depending on where you live. Somewhat paradoxically, this tended to dampen rows about taxation. "We are putting up taxes in order to renovate the school buildings" is easier to swallow if you can see that the buildings do indeed need renovating, and you can watch them being spruced up as you drive past. Overall, I thought that the system worked very well, at least away from the big cities. After all, it is not often that you can berate your local politician in the changing room after a game of badminton.

However, neighbourly service ran into the brick wall of the right-wing Government's desire to limit the size of the state, and stop any further rises in taxes. Small kommuner were "obviously" inefficient, and unsuited to the tasks of the modern world; attracting new businesses to the area, for instance. It was decided that the minimum size of a kommune should be 20,000 inhabitants, which was the previous average (7 of the 98 are in fact below that threshold, but they have special support arrangements with neighbouring kommuner). Bigger entities would in turn free up huge amounts of administrative savings, which could be used to improve the quality of local government services. And so our small kommune has merged with its five rural neighbours, into a body with about 40,000 inhabitants.

Almost three years on, what has been the effect? Service levels have definitely gone down. The various functions have been merged into one location, so the building permit office is now 20 miles away, as is the tax office. Potential new businesses are automatically shown to the areas next to the motorway at the northern edge; the kommune may now be better at competing with other kommuner, but there is a new tension within the kommune. The number of paid politicans has gone down; but each of them knows less about their electorates, and they have to drive around a much larger area in order to go to meetings. My former badminton partner rarely plays badminton these days.

Any what about those mythical administrative savings, the raison d'etre of the whole thing? It turns out that they were just that, a myth. Former tasks carried out by the regions (which now deal pretty much only with hospitals) were delegated down to the kommuner, which lacked the money and skills to carry them out; major road maintenance, for instance, or institutions for troubled children. IT-systems were sometimes incompatible. So not only have administration costs risen since 2006, but the number of administrative personnel, particularly heads of department, has actually increased. Both kommuner and amter are compensating by firing service personnel in order to remain within cash spending limits mandated by central government.

Virtually all European governments are facing pressures to cut the size of the state. I don't underestimate at all how difficult that will be. But when you hear a politician telling you that there are easy fixes to be had by "cutting waste", "administrative savings" and such like, remember to take the pitch with a huge pinch of salt. It will very rarely turn out to be true.

Walter Blotscher

Thursday 16 September 2010

ICHIRO OZAWA

The defeat of Ichiro Ozawa in the contest for the leadership of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan is good news for anybody concerned about the country's future. Since a victory for Mr. Ozawa would automatically have made him Prime Minister, much was at stake. Japan is not out of the woods yet, but at least one potential problem seems to have become smaller.

Mr. Ozawa is the great destructive force in Japanese politics. A consummate politician, who was first elected to the Diet before he was 30, he became secretary general of the permanently ruling Liberal Democratic Party in 1989 while still in his late 40's, ridiculously young by Japanese standards. His organisational skills and ability to forge compromises amongst the LDP's factions earned him respect and hatred in equal measure from his older colleagues. The latter won; and when Mr. Ozawa's patron was implicated in a corruption scandal in 1992, the knives came out. Mr. Ozawa saw the writing on the wall, and in 1993 stormed out of the LDP to form the Japan Renewal Party. For the next decade, the big question in Japanese politics was whether Mr. Ozawa and his supporters would return to the LDP in some way or try to wreck it from outside. There were many twists and turns in this story, but the endgame was reached in 2003 when he and his supporters joined the DJP. Mr. Ozawa eventually became its leader, and in 2007 led the party to victory in the upper house elections. This was followed by a thumping victory for the DJP in the elections for the much more important lower house of the Diet in August 2009. For the first time since the Second World War, the LDP seemed a spent force.

By then, Mr. Ozawa was no longer leader, but the party's secretary general. A scandal had forced him to resign, to be replaced by Yukio Hatayama, who became Prime Minister after the election. Mr. Ozawa was not in Government, but was widely perceived as the power behind the scenes. A further scandal brought down both men in June 2010, when Naoto Kan took over as party leader and Prime Minister. It was Mr. Kan, who narrowly won this week's vote, after Mr. Ozawa had challenged him to the leadership.

The election showed why people are either for or against Mr. Ozawa. Mr. Kan won, because he got the backing of local lawmakers and party members, who are sick of the continual changes in party and national leadership. Yet he won just a bare majority of the party's M.P.'s, as a large faction remains loyal to Mr. Ozawa. Will the latter now break away from the DPJ, and start the realignment process all over again? After all, one of the scandals during his time as DPJ leader was his attempt back in 2007 to forge a grand coalition with the LDP.

A new rupture might suit Mr. Ozawa's personal ambitions, but would not be good for Japan. The 17 years since Mr. Ozawa's original split from the LDP have coincided with the stagnation of the Japanese economy. It is clear that the LDP (widely held to be neither liberal, democratic nor a party) was not up to the job of sorting out the mess. With its resounding victory in 2009, it appeared that the electorate thought that the DPJ might do rather better. However, Mr. Ozawa's antics have shown that he is in many ways merely the LDP in different clothing. Stopping him becoming leader was the first step in the DJP's showing that things really are different, and that the old, unaccountable ways really are a thing of the past. As I say, Japan is not out of the woods yet by any means. But at least the DJP has given itself the chance to do something about the problems. If Mr. Ozawa could agree to harness his formidable talents to this endeavour, then the chance would be even bigger. Time will show if he can.

Walter Blotscher

Wednesday 15 September 2010

MOLE WARFARE (3)

My cutting back the wood prompted the Mole Army to launch a suicidal flanking attack this week. Abandoning the compost heap, the kamikaze rodent circled through the wood and attacked from the north through the cornfield. He left a whole pile of hills by the big beech tree, and even managed to get under the house. That hasn't happened since we moved in here in 2002, and opened up the possibility of an attack on the front lawn on the other side. A potential nightmare.

But, but, but, Mr. Moley. I am a better hunter than I was 8 years ago. I left a decoy trap by the big beech tree, and my main weapon right on the edge of the house. Sure enough, after less than 24 hours, I had got him.

Sorry guys, but you are going to have to do a lot better than that, if you want to defeat me. You may think I am just a First World War trenches man, but I can handle Blitzkrieg just as well.

Walter Blotscher

Tuesday 14 September 2010

THE U.S. OPEN (2)

I predicted one of the two winners at the U.S. Open. Kim Clijsters cruised to victory in the women's singles final, after a pulsating semi-final against Venus Williams, in which Clijsters alternated between playing brilliantly and like a drain. It was her third U.S. Open title in a row.

On the men's side, I had picked Roger Federer to win through. However, after playing superbly for most of the two weeks, his serve let him down in the semi-final against Novak Djokovic (though he still had two match points at one stage). An exhausted Djokovic was then beaten in the final by current world number 1 Rafael Nadal. This was Nadal's ninth Grand Slam title, and makes him only the seventh player in history to have won all four of them in his career, joining Federer in that select list.

One of the oddities about the men's game at the moment is that it has never had so much strength in depth, yet continues to be dominated by just two players. In the past seven years, Federer and Nadal have won 24 of the 28 Grand Slam titles on offer. Only the 2004 French Open (Gaston Gaudio), 2005 Australian Open (Marat Safin), 2008 Australian Open (Djokovic) and 2009 U.S. Open (Juan Martin del Potro) have gone to another player.

Looking ahead to next year, it would be a brave man who bet against those two harvesting all four titles between them again. The best hope for the rest of the field is that they get injured.

Walter Blotscher

Monday 13 September 2010

AFGHANISTAN (2)

Readers of this blog will know that I think the war in Afghanistan is futile and unwinnable.

I am heartened to read that the Afghanistan Study Group in Washington agrees with me, and for pretty much the same reasons. The link to their recently published report is here.

Walter Blotscher

Sunday 12 September 2010

AUSTAUSCH

Today we welcomed a 16-year old German girl to our house. She will be spending the next four weeks here, as part of an exchange ("Austausch") between her school in Northern Germany and my daughter's school. The exchange programme has been going on for many years, and both my sons went on it. They had a great time, and still keep in touch with the Germans they met through it.

I think exchanges between children from different countries are a great thing. They learn at a relatively young age that although the food, the tastes, the language and the culture are all different, at heart everybody is pretty much the same, a kid wanting to have good experiences and fun. We have had children from France, Germany and Algeria staying with us; and our children have been to Finland, Germany and England. My younger son spent a year in Switzerland as a 16-year old, and it did him a world of good. Against that background, when they listen to politicians going on about "too many immigrants" (as they are wont to do at the moment, at least in Denmark), they look puzzled. Denmark may be nice, but who wants to be just Danish and nothing else?

Already after 4-5 hours, we are getting on in a mixture of English, Danish and German, and my rusty German (I went to school, and worked, in Germany as a lad) is creaking its way out of its decidedly dusty mental cupboard. It's uplifting, and gives hope for the future.

Walter Blotscher

Saturday 11 September 2010

9/11

It's hard to know what to write about 9/11. I don't have a theme, which encapsulates the whole thing, more a series of comments and questions. For what it's worth, here they are.

Will the annual ceremony in Manhattan, which marks the destruction of the twin towers, turn into a national day of mourning for all those killed in war, a bit like Remembrance Day in the U.K., which is held on 11 November each year? I hope it does. For although what happened was terrible, it doesn't seem right to elevate the 3,000-odd killed and give them almost mythical status. Ordinary people have been killed in terrorist attacks elsewhere - indeed, they are still being killed in such attacks today - and their lives were just as important, the grief of their friends and relatives just as strong.

9/11 has a peculiarly American feel to it, starting with the date (the opposite of that used in most of the rest of the world). Perhaps it is that uniqueness that makes Americans want to cling on to remembering it so fervently. Europeans, and other nations, have after all experienced bouts of terrorism and destruction before, not least during the Second World War. This was for America not only a terrible event, but pretty much a first. That's bound to have an effect.

I am dismayed by the attempt of many, both Americans and foreigners, to equate terrorism with Islam, as evinced by the row over the building of a Muslim cultural centre on Lower Manhattan, not far from Ground Zero. If 9/11 teaches us anything, then it is (in my view) the need for mutual respect between cultures and religions. The witless American pastor from Florida, Mr Terry Jones, has had his 15 minutes of fame, but it is sad that supposedly religious people can be so stupid; returning to the prejudices of the Reformation does not make the modern world any better. President Obama has tried to make this point, but he needs to keep on making it.

I hope that the eventual redevelopment of the Ground Zero site will make the process of reconciliation easier. As long as there was a big hole in the ground, it was like a scar that refused to heal. But new buildings, including a memorial, will in time demonstrate more clearly than anything else that life can, and does, move on.

Walter Blotscher

Friday 10 September 2010

KOSOVO (3)

After Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia was declared legal by the International Court of Justice, the Serbs went into their thinking box. The result was a unanimous resolution by the U.N.'s General Assembly, calling for dialogue between the two sides.

This was not in fact what Serbia had originally wanted. In an earlier draft, Serbia had rejected Kosovo's secession and asked for new negotiations on the legal status of its former entity. However, realpolitik then prevailed. The E.U., which Serbia wishes to join and most of whose members have already recognised Kosovo, let it be known that the earlier draft, if passed, would end Serbia's path to accession. Serbia blinked.

In effect, this marks the end of Serbia's fight to keep Kosovo, and a beginning of the end-game for resolving the Kosovo problem. Serbia won't admit that, of course, but that is what it is.

Walter Blotscher

Thursday 9 September 2010

BACON

One of the adverse consequences of my sons' leaving home is a reduction in the amount of meat in the house. My daughter is vegetarian, and my wife likes to humour that, so poor old dad has to go along with it. Which can be tough at times, particularly when I see two packs of bacon staring at me whenever I open the fridge. Bacon is probably the food I like more than any other, so this is not easy.

And that is so, even though the bacon in Denmark is not great. Being a pig-infested country, you would think that it was the tops; but it is not, it's that miserable kind that shrinks in half as soon as it hits the pan. A good thick rasher is just not to be had. Danes are always telling me that the best stuff is all sent to the U.K. and elsewhere, but couldn 't they have reserved a few packets for people like me?

Anyway, despite my daughter's vegetarianism and the poor quality of Danish bacon, my patience was exhausted this evening. Out came one of the packs, and all eight slices hit the pan. After duly shrivelling down to the size of four, they formed the basis for two rather large bacon and cheese toasties. Not good for my physical health, but terrific for my mental health, as I settled down to watch the U.S. Open quarter final on the telly.

Walter Blotscher

Wednesday 8 September 2010

FRENCH PENSIONS

I said earlier that the French Government's announcement in June that it intended to raise the retirement age, one of the lowest in Europe, from 60 to 62 would not be received with open arms. Far from it. At least a million people took to the streets this week to protest against the proposal (and other mooted austerity measures), while a 24-hour national strike disrupted public transport and closed schools.

It's hard to see how the Government can find a compromise. The pension system is bust; and 62 is low in comparison with both other E.U. countries and French life expectancy. Moreover, if the Government can't win this fight, then it will be difficult to push through any sort of reform, even though much is needed, and not just on pensions.

It may just be possible that this was a late summer letting-off of steam prior to sullen resignation and acceptance of the inevitable. However, I have to say that I doubt it. This looks more like a fight to the death for preservation of the French way of life, even if that way of life is economically unsustainable. Expect more protests this autumn.

Walter Blotscher

Tuesday 7 September 2010

YDING SKOVHOEJ

I drove to Jutland today, and took the opportunity to pass over Yding Skovhoej ("forest height"), the highest point in Denmark. At just under 173m above sea level, it is not anywhere near the size of a mountain. Nevertheless, it still gives a tremendous view over the valley formed by the Gudenaa, at 176km the country's longest river.

The highest point in Denmark is, in fact, somewhat controversial. Yding wins only because there is a man-made bronze age burial mound sitting right on the top of it. Without that, it would be 9cm less than Moellehoej ("mill height"), a few kilometers away. The latter takes its name from the eight-sided mill that stood on its top until 1917, but it only became well-known in 2005, after a new, and more accurate, set of measurements had been made. Before that, Yding had vied for the title with Ejer Bavnehoej ("beacon height"), also just down the road.

All of which seems to confirm that if there isn't much of something (height, in this case), then people will tend to bicker and squabble about it.

Walter Blotscher

Monday 6 September 2010

NUCLEAR POWER IN EUROPE

If it obtains the necessary Parliamentary approval, then yesterday's announcement by the German Government that it will extend the life of the country's 17 nuclear power stations by an average of 12 years will have implications for other European countries.

All industrialised countries are facing a dilemna. They are committed to reducing their carbon emissions substantially; yet the obvious low-carbon renewable power sources (wind and solar) are both unreliable and economically uncompetitive. On the other hand, the cheapest and most reliable fuel sources for generating electricity (coal and, at the margin, nuclear) are either full of carbon or potentially dangerous (and expensive in the long-term, because of decommissioning costs). The dilemna is particularly acute in Germany, which has more ambitious emissions reduction targets than other E.U. countries, yet gets almost 25% of its electricity from brown coal (lignite), an extremely dirty fuel that is one of the main reasons for Eastern Europe's appalling environment under communism. What to do? And since Germany is Europe's largest economy, where it goes, others are likely to follow.

In 2001, when the Social Democrats and Greens were in a coalition government together, it was decided to forbid the construction of new nuclear power plants, and to phase out all nuclear power by 2020. But with nuclear representing 23% of all electricity generation today and the renewables subsidy already costing Euros10 billion a year in a time of austerity, that commitment is no longer tenable. Hence the decision to increase the life of the older plants by 8 years and the newer ones by 14 years.

After months of discussions, the fact that the decision was only reached following a 12-hour meeting chaired by Chancellor Angela Merkel shows how difficult the problem is. And although it has kept the ruling CDU/FDP coalition together, it is by no means certain that the decision will stick. Apart from the issue of Parliamentary approval, one Green M.P. has already stated that any future Government including his party would reverse the extension. Moreover, public opinion polls suggest a solid 60% of the population want nuclear reactors closed. Protests are planned for this coming autumn.

Since the politics and economics are pretty much the same in other European countries, their Governments will be looking on anxiously from the sidelines. As ever, Germany appears to be taking a lead in matters European; though perhaps not in a way it would like.

Walter Blotscher

Sunday 5 September 2010

DER UNTERGANG

Last night I saw the film Der Untergang (Downfall) again. It's a brilliant portrayal of the almost surreal last few days of the second world war, as Hitler and his closest aides stay in the bunker underneath the Chancellery, while the Russian forces steadily tighten their grip on Berlin.

The situation is hopeless, but the Nazi elite refuse to surrender. Champagne mixes with shellfire. Hitler moves imaginary armies around on the map, sends out orders that can't be carried out, calmly discusses plans for the future when he knows he will soon be dead. Former comrades Goering and Himmler, who are trying to do deals with the Allies, are condemned as traitors. S.S. death squads hunt down and murder anybody who is not fighting, including the man married to Eva Braun's sister. In the last days, Hitler finally marries his long-term mistress, before committing suicide with her. Goebbels takes over and tries to impose terms on the Russians, who reject them. Goebbels' wife kills their six children in their sleep, before the parents commit suicide.

It's a compelling film, with brilliant acting. Notably by Ulrich Matthes as a clearly insane Goebbels, and Bruno Ganz as the dominating, ranting, and curiously tender Hitler.

Walter Blotscher

Saturday 4 September 2010

MUSHROOMS

Today was a beautiful late summer's day, so the friends we were visiting asked my wife and me if we wanted to go and pick wild mushrooms in the forest. Now mushrooms are one of those things where I know absolutely nothing, so this was an opportunity not to be missed.

There are lots of different types of mushrooms. Some are yummy, some are bitter, some make you hallucinate, and some are so poisonous that you can die if you eat them. We were looking for Carl Johans and Cancellaras, which my wife had no trouble finding in amongst the tree roots. I on the other hand could find nothing but these large mushrooms which look a bit like miniature spacecraft, and are to be avoided.

Living as we do next to a wood, we have quite a lot of mushrooms at home. The most common variety is a long, thin thing with a hat on, which in Danish is called "the Priest's dick", presumably because it looks like one. It also has a rather nasty tendency to drip black ink all over the place, but I don't know if that is because members of the Lutheran church do the same.

It will not surprise you to discover that Priest's dicks are not be eaten. I will have to chew them up with my trusty motor mower instead.

Walter Blotscher

Friday 3 September 2010

THE U.S. OPEN

There have been brutal heat and high winds at the U.S. Open tennis tournament, which started this week. As Mats Wilander says in his always perceptive analysis on Game, Set and Match, this doesn't help the big guys. With the result that a surprising number of the men's seeds have gone out in the early rounds, notably Wimbledon finalist Tomas Berdych, who was unceremoniously stuffed in his first round match by unseeded Michael Llodra.

However, the big four (Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Murray) are still there, and it is looking increasingly likely that they will be the four semi-finalists. My tip? Nadal is world number 1, winner of the French Open and Wimbledon this year, and looking very good. But I have a sneaking suspicion that the Fedster will produce a rabbit out of the hat, and win his 17th grand slam title at the age of 29.

On the women's side, the absence of both current world number 1 and clear favourite Serena Williams and former world number 1 Justine Henin makes things much more of a lottery. In their absence, the whole of Denmark is rooting for last year's losing finalist Caroline Wozniacki, the number 1 seed. However, although she moves well and is very solid in her groundstrokes, I just don't think she has the variety of shot to win. I am going for last year's winner Kim Clijsters to do a repeat performance.

Walter Blotscher

Thursday 2 September 2010

THE CONTRAPOSITIVE

The contrapositive is a term of logic. The contrapositive of the if-then sentence "if he is a king, then he is a man" is "if he is not a man, then he is not a king". The two are, logically speaking, the same (logically equivalent, in the jargon).

That makes the contrapositive a useful little tool, particularly when it comes to the question of proof. I give an example. In mathematics, it is important to know that if you can find a solution to a problem, then that solution will be unique. That allows you to muck about with the problem until you find a solution. It doesn't matter whether it is a simple or a complicated solution, or how you find it, if you can find one that works, then that's good enough.

Proving that a solution is unique from first principles is difficult, if not impossible. So we use the contrapositive. We assume that the solution is not unique; and (like the man/king sentence at the top) work backwards to show that that would then breach the assumptions in the problem. Because the contrapositive is logically equivalent to the original statement, we have now proved the latter.

We can also use the tool in everyday life, to test the truth of politicians and others. "If he really believed x, then he would do y" is a statement. If that statement holds true, and y doesn't happen, then the contrapositive demonstrates conclusively that he doesn't really believe x.

Try it some time. You will have logic on your side.

Walter Blotscher

Wednesday 1 September 2010

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SPEECH

This morning I watched the whole of President Obama's address to the nation on the formal ending of combat operations in Iraq, all 18 minutes of it.

Overall, I was disappointed. The President is quite clearly a very gifted orator. But oratory is only fine if you have something meaty to say. His style worked as a candidate and at the beginning of his term, since everything was then still in the future. The future is now the present, and style is no substitute for concrete actions. There was a lot of upbeat talk about ending Saddam Hussein's regime, Iraqis taking over their own security, the U.S. being a partner for the future. There was nothing about - as I said earlier - continuing bomb attacks and the complete absence of an Iraqi Government. Nor about the festering sore of the prison at Guantanamo Bay (which, let us remember, Mr. Obama had promised, in one of his first actions as President, to disband by the beginning of 2010).

One thing for me summed up the divergence between talk and reality. At the end of the speech, there was a long homily about the withdrawal of the 4th Stryker Brigade, the last U.S. combat force in Iraq, across the border to Kuwait in the dead of night, and the contrast between the dark of the night and the light of the future represented by the handing over of security to the Iraqis. The Brigade, during its tour of duty, lost 55 men killed. On the same BBC webpage that showed the President's speech, a report from Pakistan said that at least 45 people had been killed in an attack on militants in the tribal areas of the country near the Afghanistan border. However much the President may wish the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan to end, and however much he may say that they are being won, I fear that they are not. The killing in both countries will go on for a while yet.

Walter Blotscher