THE LOCAL CINEMA (2)
Readers of this blog will know that I am a fan of our local cinema, which I visit regularly with my daughter.
At last night's AGM of the association that runs it, I was very chuffed to be elected to the Board. The hope is that I will bring energy and enthusiasm to the cinema, so that it can survive against the evils of piracy, downloading, video rentals and general couch potato'ism. I will certainly try; but what we really need is a large dollop of cash in order to digitalise the projector, and thereby keep up with technology. All contributions gratefully received ...
Walter Blotscher
Thursday 31 March 2011
Wednesday 30 March 2011
TAX REFORM IN THE U.K.
Last week's Budget in the U.K. was a bit of a damp squib. Normally one of the set-piece events of Parliament, setting out the tax changes to the new fiscal year starting on 6 April, everything was constrained by the Coalition's emergency Budget of last summer, which set out the medium-term plan of tax rises and spending cuts designed to sort out the country's finances, and the pre-Budget report of last autumn, which detailed where those spending cuts would fall. Having made the strategic decision to stick to the plan, despite a poor economic performance in the fourth quarter of 2010, Chancellor Goerge Osborne was reduced to announcing a series of "lollipops", as they are known in the trade, eye-catching initatives that don't cost much and so can't do much harm.
However, tucked away in the bowels of the Budget speech was one potentially major reform. The Chancellor will consult widely about the possibility of integrating the regimes for income tax and national insurance contributions (NICs). First introduced in 1911, NICs were originally, as their name suggests, insurance premiums designed to protect workers against illness and unemployment; they were then extended to cover pensions. This insurance aspect remains in one respect, since the right to a state pension and other benefits depends on one's having contributed (i.e. paid) NICs for a certain number of years; so, although I have not lived in the U.K. since 1992, I still have the right to a full basic state pension when I retire, since I have paid voluntary contributions each year from wherever I have been living. However, since pensions are paid by the Government on a pay-as-you-go basis, and since other welfare benefits have emerged to take account of illness and unemployment, NICs have gradually come to seem from a fiscal point of view more and more like any other tax. Calls to merge them with the general tax system have, therefore, been around for many years.
All of which seems both sensible and straightforward. There is however a big "but", which makes the whole thing fiendishly difficult; the bases for the two systems are different. As one famous House of Lords tax case put it, income tax is a tax on income, meaning all income; NICs, on the other hand, are a tax on the earnings of employees and the self-employed, but are not levied on other forms of income. For many people, earnings from employment are the whole or main source of their total income, so the distinction is not material. But for some groups, they are. When you look at those groups, you quickly realise that merging tax and NICs is not easy.
Who pays tax, but no NICs? One group of people here are those with no job, but lots of non-employment income such as dividends and interest; rich landowners and their ilk. Subjecting them to NICs would probably go down well in these straightened times. But there is another, much larger, group in this category, and that is pensioners. Not only are pensions not subject to NICs, but neither are pensioners' employment earnings, even though they would be NIC'able for anyone else. Tinkering with pensioners' rights is generally considered to be the third rail of Western politics; touch them and you die. This assumption is currently being reviewed (eg in Greece), as rich societies come to the realisation that the benefits they have promised pensioners are simply not sustainable in the long-run. Nevertheless, it remains the case both that pensioners represent a formidably united lobbying group and that they are the part of the electorate who are most likely to vote. For these reasons tax-reforming politicians tend to treat them with kid gloves.
Who pays NICs, but no tax? This consists mainly of low-paid workers. The personal tax allowance (the amount of income that is tax-free) is £7,475 from 6 April 2011, or £143,75 per week. The lower limit for NICs, on the other hand, will be £102 per week. In a previous move to combat this discrepancy, earnings up to £139 a week are NIC-able, thereby giving the working poor access to other benefits, but are not in fact paid (I told you this was not easy). However, £139 is still not the same as £143,75. Moroever, NICs are payable per job, so someone doing two part-time jobs paying £100 a week pays no NICs, whereas someone doing one job paying £200 a week does. Aligning the tax and NIC systems at the bottom end, and smoothing out all the wrinkles and interactions with the rest of the benefit system would undoubtedly make life easier all round. The problem with any changes at the bottom end is that they benefit everybody above it, and so are hugely expensive; every pound of change costs a lot. That is not easy in the current climate.
These are just a sprinkling of the problems that need to be ironed out. Which is why previous Governments have looked at this issue and backed away. When I worked in the Treasury at the end of the 1980's, a possible merger of the two systems was a hot topic, but it was "kicked into the long grass", along with reform of the residence rules, as simply too difficult. Since then, the system has become even more complicated and tangled, partly because of the deemed contribution change outlined above and partly because of Gordon Brown's new system of tax credits. And we haven't even begun to discuss the tax treatment of couples.
So, my prediction is that Mr. Osborne will consult widely, over a long period of time, and then not do very much.
Walter Blotscher
Last week's Budget in the U.K. was a bit of a damp squib. Normally one of the set-piece events of Parliament, setting out the tax changes to the new fiscal year starting on 6 April, everything was constrained by the Coalition's emergency Budget of last summer, which set out the medium-term plan of tax rises and spending cuts designed to sort out the country's finances, and the pre-Budget report of last autumn, which detailed where those spending cuts would fall. Having made the strategic decision to stick to the plan, despite a poor economic performance in the fourth quarter of 2010, Chancellor Goerge Osborne was reduced to announcing a series of "lollipops", as they are known in the trade, eye-catching initatives that don't cost much and so can't do much harm.
However, tucked away in the bowels of the Budget speech was one potentially major reform. The Chancellor will consult widely about the possibility of integrating the regimes for income tax and national insurance contributions (NICs). First introduced in 1911, NICs were originally, as their name suggests, insurance premiums designed to protect workers against illness and unemployment; they were then extended to cover pensions. This insurance aspect remains in one respect, since the right to a state pension and other benefits depends on one's having contributed (i.e. paid) NICs for a certain number of years; so, although I have not lived in the U.K. since 1992, I still have the right to a full basic state pension when I retire, since I have paid voluntary contributions each year from wherever I have been living. However, since pensions are paid by the Government on a pay-as-you-go basis, and since other welfare benefits have emerged to take account of illness and unemployment, NICs have gradually come to seem from a fiscal point of view more and more like any other tax. Calls to merge them with the general tax system have, therefore, been around for many years.
All of which seems both sensible and straightforward. There is however a big "but", which makes the whole thing fiendishly difficult; the bases for the two systems are different. As one famous House of Lords tax case put it, income tax is a tax on income, meaning all income; NICs, on the other hand, are a tax on the earnings of employees and the self-employed, but are not levied on other forms of income. For many people, earnings from employment are the whole or main source of their total income, so the distinction is not material. But for some groups, they are. When you look at those groups, you quickly realise that merging tax and NICs is not easy.
Who pays tax, but no NICs? One group of people here are those with no job, but lots of non-employment income such as dividends and interest; rich landowners and their ilk. Subjecting them to NICs would probably go down well in these straightened times. But there is another, much larger, group in this category, and that is pensioners. Not only are pensions not subject to NICs, but neither are pensioners' employment earnings, even though they would be NIC'able for anyone else. Tinkering with pensioners' rights is generally considered to be the third rail of Western politics; touch them and you die. This assumption is currently being reviewed (eg in Greece), as rich societies come to the realisation that the benefits they have promised pensioners are simply not sustainable in the long-run. Nevertheless, it remains the case both that pensioners represent a formidably united lobbying group and that they are the part of the electorate who are most likely to vote. For these reasons tax-reforming politicians tend to treat them with kid gloves.
Who pays NICs, but no tax? This consists mainly of low-paid workers. The personal tax allowance (the amount of income that is tax-free) is £7,475 from 6 April 2011, or £143,75 per week. The lower limit for NICs, on the other hand, will be £102 per week. In a previous move to combat this discrepancy, earnings up to £139 a week are NIC-able, thereby giving the working poor access to other benefits, but are not in fact paid (I told you this was not easy). However, £139 is still not the same as £143,75. Moroever, NICs are payable per job, so someone doing two part-time jobs paying £100 a week pays no NICs, whereas someone doing one job paying £200 a week does. Aligning the tax and NIC systems at the bottom end, and smoothing out all the wrinkles and interactions with the rest of the benefit system would undoubtedly make life easier all round. The problem with any changes at the bottom end is that they benefit everybody above it, and so are hugely expensive; every pound of change costs a lot. That is not easy in the current climate.
These are just a sprinkling of the problems that need to be ironed out. Which is why previous Governments have looked at this issue and backed away. When I worked in the Treasury at the end of the 1980's, a possible merger of the two systems was a hot topic, but it was "kicked into the long grass", along with reform of the residence rules, as simply too difficult. Since then, the system has become even more complicated and tangled, partly because of the deemed contribution change outlined above and partly because of Gordon Brown's new system of tax credits. And we haven't even begun to discuss the tax treatment of couples.
So, my prediction is that Mr. Osborne will consult widely, over a long period of time, and then not do very much.
Walter Blotscher
Tuesday 29 March 2011
THE PILLARS OF THE EARTH
Some 30 years ago, I watched a film in a London cinema called Eye of the Needle, starring the ever watchable Donald Sutherland and a rather sexy Kate Nelligan. The story of a German spy operating in wartime England, it was the most successful of a series of thrillers written by Ken Follett. But I never read the book.
In 1989, Mr. Follett published a different kind of novel. The Pillars of the Earth is about the building of a cathedral in mid-12th century England, against a background of anarchy and civil war, as Maud, the daughter of King Henry I (who had died without a legitimate male heir) fought against Henry's nephew Stephen, who had taken over the throne and been crowned after his uncle's death. This book has been a phenomenal success. Published in 30 languages, by the end of 2010 it had sold almost 19 million copies worldwide. It was the most widely read book in Spain in 2010. In the BBC's Big Read in 2003, it was voted by readers as one of the 100 best books. In 2006, it was voted the third best book ever in Germany, after The Lord of the Rings and the Bible. A TV mini-series that came out last summer was reputedly one of the most expensive ever made.
In Denmark, where it is known as Jordens Søjler, it is the same story. I know a fair number of people, who don't read many books, yet who have read this one. My 16-year old daughter told me last night that many of her classmates have read it, and that some think it is the best book they have ever read. When I heard that it had been written by Ken Follett, I was rather sceptical; why on earth was it so popular?
And so I decided to read it myself, all 1,076 pages in paperback form. The first thing to say about it is that it is not great literature. The story bowls along fairly easily, the fictional characters are woven into the historical facts, and there is a lot of period detail. But I got much of that a couple of years back from a similar book called When Christ And His Saints Slept, which is much better written. The 1,000 pages got swallowed up without too much difficulty, but at the end I was still left wondering why it had sold so many copies. Perhaps people just don't want anything more demanding in their literature?
Walter Blotscher
Some 30 years ago, I watched a film in a London cinema called Eye of the Needle, starring the ever watchable Donald Sutherland and a rather sexy Kate Nelligan. The story of a German spy operating in wartime England, it was the most successful of a series of thrillers written by Ken Follett. But I never read the book.
In 1989, Mr. Follett published a different kind of novel. The Pillars of the Earth is about the building of a cathedral in mid-12th century England, against a background of anarchy and civil war, as Maud, the daughter of King Henry I (who had died without a legitimate male heir) fought against Henry's nephew Stephen, who had taken over the throne and been crowned after his uncle's death. This book has been a phenomenal success. Published in 30 languages, by the end of 2010 it had sold almost 19 million copies worldwide. It was the most widely read book in Spain in 2010. In the BBC's Big Read in 2003, it was voted by readers as one of the 100 best books. In 2006, it was voted the third best book ever in Germany, after The Lord of the Rings and the Bible. A TV mini-series that came out last summer was reputedly one of the most expensive ever made.
In Denmark, where it is known as Jordens Søjler, it is the same story. I know a fair number of people, who don't read many books, yet who have read this one. My 16-year old daughter told me last night that many of her classmates have read it, and that some think it is the best book they have ever read. When I heard that it had been written by Ken Follett, I was rather sceptical; why on earth was it so popular?
And so I decided to read it myself, all 1,076 pages in paperback form. The first thing to say about it is that it is not great literature. The story bowls along fairly easily, the fictional characters are woven into the historical facts, and there is a lot of period detail. But I got much of that a couple of years back from a similar book called When Christ And His Saints Slept, which is much better written. The 1,000 pages got swallowed up without too much difficulty, but at the end I was still left wondering why it had sold so many copies. Perhaps people just don't want anything more demanding in their literature?
Walter Blotscher
Monday 28 March 2011
BADEN-WÜRTTEMBERG
It is hard to overestimate the scale of the defeat for Chancellor Angela Merkel in this weekend's regional election in Baden-Württemberg, a Land which her party, the CDU, have run since 1953. Populous and wealthy, the state is in many ways the CDU's heartland. Although its share of the vote, at 39%, was still the largest of any party, support for its coalition partner, the FDP, collapsed. The big winners were the Greens, who polled just over 24% and who will now govern in coalition with the Social Democrats, who got a little less.
The big issue of the election was nuclear power, in the wake of the problems in Japan. Mrs. Merkel tried to defuse it by suspending for three months the Government's earlier decision to extend the life of the country's ageing nuclear reactors, four of which are based in Baden-Württemberg. However, as I said earlier this week, the problems in Japan have unleashed such great fears that one gesture was always unlikely to be enough. That was brutally confirmed this weekend.
Walter Blotscher
It is hard to overestimate the scale of the defeat for Chancellor Angela Merkel in this weekend's regional election in Baden-Württemberg, a Land which her party, the CDU, have run since 1953. Populous and wealthy, the state is in many ways the CDU's heartland. Although its share of the vote, at 39%, was still the largest of any party, support for its coalition partner, the FDP, collapsed. The big winners were the Greens, who polled just over 24% and who will now govern in coalition with the Social Democrats, who got a little less.
The big issue of the election was nuclear power, in the wake of the problems in Japan. Mrs. Merkel tried to defuse it by suspending for three months the Government's earlier decision to extend the life of the country's ageing nuclear reactors, four of which are based in Baden-Württemberg. However, as I said earlier this week, the problems in Japan have unleashed such great fears that one gesture was always unlikely to be enough. That was brutally confirmed this weekend.
Walter Blotscher
Sunday 27 March 2011
COMPUTER KEYBOARDS
I cleaned my computer keyboard this morning. Yep, that's right.
Let's be honest, how often do we do that? For me, I think that that was the first time ever. Yet we should try to keep them clean. Research by the University of Arizona has found that the average office desk has more than 400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat. And one of the biggest repositories of desk germs is the computer keyboard, often caused by crumbs generated by people eating while they work.
Since I am pretty well the only person who uses my computer at home, the health risk is probably not too great. But in places like hospitals, dirty computers (and other things, like water cooler handles) can be deadly. One more reason why I am glad I am not a medic.
Walter Blotscher
I cleaned my computer keyboard this morning. Yep, that's right.
Let's be honest, how often do we do that? For me, I think that that was the first time ever. Yet we should try to keep them clean. Research by the University of Arizona has found that the average office desk has more than 400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat. And one of the biggest repositories of desk germs is the computer keyboard, often caused by crumbs generated by people eating while they work.
Since I am pretty well the only person who uses my computer at home, the health risk is probably not too great. But in places like hospitals, dirty computers (and other things, like water cooler handles) can be deadly. One more reason why I am glad I am not a medic.
Walter Blotscher
Saturday 26 March 2011
POLISH BEER
My wife has just been on an exchange trip to Poland with her school, and very kindly brought me back some Polish beer, some of which I am drinking as I write this.
I like Polish beer, piwo. I like its fundamental premises, which are big bottles and strength. The beer I am currently drinking is 500ml size (none of this namby pamby 333ml) and almost 6%. Other brands can be even stronger. A couple of these with my dinner while watching the football, and I will sleep soundly thereafter.
Walter Blotscher
My wife has just been on an exchange trip to Poland with her school, and very kindly brought me back some Polish beer, some of which I am drinking as I write this.
I like Polish beer, piwo. I like its fundamental premises, which are big bottles and strength. The beer I am currently drinking is 500ml size (none of this namby pamby 333ml) and almost 6%. Other brands can be even stronger. A couple of these with my dinner while watching the football, and I will sleep soundly thereafter.
Walter Blotscher
Friday 25 March 2011
GOODS AND SERVICES
One of the problems of living in a rich country in an increasingly globalised world is that although many goods are getting ever cheaper, many services are getting outrageously expensive. Take haircuts, the archetypal domestic service. My daughter had her hair cut yesterday in a small, rural town - just cut, not washed or styled or anything else - and it cost kr.340, or about £40. Since I can't afford these prices, I either have to wait until I get to the U.K. and have it done for under £10 in one of those walk-in-off-the-street places in London, or get my sister-in-law to do it for free (well, for the price of sharing a bottle of wine).
So what, you may ask? The division of an economy between goods and services is irrelevant, what matters is the total level of output. Countries generally go through a development process, whereby manaufactured goods begin to take over from subsistence agriculture. At a certain point the share of manufacturing in the economy starts to decline again (even though it is still growing in absolute terms) as services become more and more important. More than 60% of modern, rich economies' output comes from services.
However, although the above is true, the relative cheapness of goods pushes us in directions which are not necessarily healthy. I give an example. I can buy a Bosch washing machine on the internet and have it delivered to my door within 3 days for kr.1.965, roughly £230 (I know, since I have just checked). Because of E.U. consumer protection laws, the machine comes with a 2-year warranty; so if anything happens, the manufacturer has to come and replace or repair it. At the end of that 2-year period, the machine ought to be still usable for a number of years. But, like a car, it is still a machine, and so can go wrong from time to time. The problem is that if it did go wrong, it would not be worth trying to have it repaired. It costs a minimum of kr.1.000 for a serviceman just to come and have a look at it; and that's before he starts sourcing spare parts and/or repairing the thing. It makes much more sense to take the old machine to the dump and buy a new one. Judging from our local rubbish collection centre, plenty of people do just that, it is full of newish-looking fridges and washing machines and dishwashers. A perfectly rational decision for the individual, but a huge waste of resources for society as a whole.
Nowhere is this more true than in my building project. Cement costs kr.50 for 25kg, and mortar about the same. Gravel from the local pit is kr.60 for half a tonne, almost - literally - nothing. The bricks themselves are free, since I am using old ones from other parts of the barn. What costs in building is labour. If I had to get someone else to do it, then I would have to pay them kr.500 an hour including VAT; and to generate that under the Danish tax system, I would have to go out and earn closer to kr.1.000. If I didn't build myself, I couldn't afford it.
In the old days, people used to make, mend, and maintain virtually everything they used. I am not suggesting going back to those times. But I am not at all sure that the current differences in the prices between goods and services are sustainable. Something will have to give.
Walter Blotscher
One of the problems of living in a rich country in an increasingly globalised world is that although many goods are getting ever cheaper, many services are getting outrageously expensive. Take haircuts, the archetypal domestic service. My daughter had her hair cut yesterday in a small, rural town - just cut, not washed or styled or anything else - and it cost kr.340, or about £40. Since I can't afford these prices, I either have to wait until I get to the U.K. and have it done for under £10 in one of those walk-in-off-the-street places in London, or get my sister-in-law to do it for free (well, for the price of sharing a bottle of wine).
So what, you may ask? The division of an economy between goods and services is irrelevant, what matters is the total level of output. Countries generally go through a development process, whereby manaufactured goods begin to take over from subsistence agriculture. At a certain point the share of manufacturing in the economy starts to decline again (even though it is still growing in absolute terms) as services become more and more important. More than 60% of modern, rich economies' output comes from services.
However, although the above is true, the relative cheapness of goods pushes us in directions which are not necessarily healthy. I give an example. I can buy a Bosch washing machine on the internet and have it delivered to my door within 3 days for kr.1.965, roughly £230 (I know, since I have just checked). Because of E.U. consumer protection laws, the machine comes with a 2-year warranty; so if anything happens, the manufacturer has to come and replace or repair it. At the end of that 2-year period, the machine ought to be still usable for a number of years. But, like a car, it is still a machine, and so can go wrong from time to time. The problem is that if it did go wrong, it would not be worth trying to have it repaired. It costs a minimum of kr.1.000 for a serviceman just to come and have a look at it; and that's before he starts sourcing spare parts and/or repairing the thing. It makes much more sense to take the old machine to the dump and buy a new one. Judging from our local rubbish collection centre, plenty of people do just that, it is full of newish-looking fridges and washing machines and dishwashers. A perfectly rational decision for the individual, but a huge waste of resources for society as a whole.
Nowhere is this more true than in my building project. Cement costs kr.50 for 25kg, and mortar about the same. Gravel from the local pit is kr.60 for half a tonne, almost - literally - nothing. The bricks themselves are free, since I am using old ones from other parts of the barn. What costs in building is labour. If I had to get someone else to do it, then I would have to pay them kr.500 an hour including VAT; and to generate that under the Danish tax system, I would have to go out and earn closer to kr.1.000. If I didn't build myself, I couldn't afford it.
In the old days, people used to make, mend, and maintain virtually everything they used. I am not suggesting going back to those times. But I am not at all sure that the current differences in the prices between goods and services are sustainable. Something will have to give.
Walter Blotscher
Thursday 24 March 2011
LIBYA (2)
If you are going to go to war, then one absolute pre-condition is to decide in advance who is in charge of it, right? After all, people have known that since at least the time of the Romans.
Apparently not. The coalition of the willing, that is enforcing the no-fly zone in Libya/actively helping the anti-Gaddafi rebels/trying to implement regime change (take your pick), has been led since last Saturday's start by the Americans. Only they had the material and intelligence resources to act quickly enough to prevent Gaddafi's forces from reaching the rebel-held stronghold of Benghazi. Yet because of a combination of domestic economic problems (how can we finance a third foreign war, when our Congress can't even pass a budget?) and a sensitivity towards the other Arab nations (is this just Iraq and Afghanistan all over again?), President Obama is desperate to pass the baton of leadership to somebody else. But to whom? Nato? France and Britain? France alone?
It is here that the neatly tied diplomatic packaging of the U.N. resolution authorising the no-fly zone starts to unravel. Start with the fact that the vote in the 15-country Security Council was not unanimous, but 10-0; five countries abstained, and they were Russia, China, Brazil, India and Germany. The last is particularly relevant, since the Germans are also members of Nato, the obvious candidate to take over leadership of an operation just across the water from Europe. Nato also includes Turkey, which has close links with the Arab world, which in turn has long taken the view that Nato is merely a creature of American expansionist ambitions. Throw in the apparent desire of France to "make a splash" after its previous mistakes over Tunisia and Egypt, coupled with its long-standing suspicion of Nato's collective structures, and it quickly becomes clear that there is no agreement about who should take over command from the U.S. There have been meetings in Nato headquarters in Belgium during the past few days, but no acceptable compromise has been found; indeed, nothing will be decided before a new meeting of coalition members in London on Monday.
If it takes so much effort merely to decide who should be in charge, how on earth can the coalition members agree on the operation's goals, which are still very unclear. As I said in my earlier piece, what is the end-game here? Nobody appears to know.
Finally, an irony. Not long ago, Barack Obama won the Nobel prize for peace. Today, he finds himself in charge of at least three wars. No wonder he wants to rid himself of at least one of them.
Walter Blotscher
If you are going to go to war, then one absolute pre-condition is to decide in advance who is in charge of it, right? After all, people have known that since at least the time of the Romans.
Apparently not. The coalition of the willing, that is enforcing the no-fly zone in Libya/actively helping the anti-Gaddafi rebels/trying to implement regime change (take your pick), has been led since last Saturday's start by the Americans. Only they had the material and intelligence resources to act quickly enough to prevent Gaddafi's forces from reaching the rebel-held stronghold of Benghazi. Yet because of a combination of domestic economic problems (how can we finance a third foreign war, when our Congress can't even pass a budget?) and a sensitivity towards the other Arab nations (is this just Iraq and Afghanistan all over again?), President Obama is desperate to pass the baton of leadership to somebody else. But to whom? Nato? France and Britain? France alone?
It is here that the neatly tied diplomatic packaging of the U.N. resolution authorising the no-fly zone starts to unravel. Start with the fact that the vote in the 15-country Security Council was not unanimous, but 10-0; five countries abstained, and they were Russia, China, Brazil, India and Germany. The last is particularly relevant, since the Germans are also members of Nato, the obvious candidate to take over leadership of an operation just across the water from Europe. Nato also includes Turkey, which has close links with the Arab world, which in turn has long taken the view that Nato is merely a creature of American expansionist ambitions. Throw in the apparent desire of France to "make a splash" after its previous mistakes over Tunisia and Egypt, coupled with its long-standing suspicion of Nato's collective structures, and it quickly becomes clear that there is no agreement about who should take over command from the U.S. There have been meetings in Nato headquarters in Belgium during the past few days, but no acceptable compromise has been found; indeed, nothing will be decided before a new meeting of coalition members in London on Monday.
If it takes so much effort merely to decide who should be in charge, how on earth can the coalition members agree on the operation's goals, which are still very unclear. As I said in my earlier piece, what is the end-game here? Nobody appears to know.
Finally, an irony. Not long ago, Barack Obama won the Nobel prize for peace. Today, he finds himself in charge of at least three wars. No wonder he wants to rid himself of at least one of them.
Walter Blotscher
Wednesday 23 March 2011
SMUG BUILDER (2)
The smug builder project is going well (he said smugly). It has been beautiful spring weather for the past week or so, so I decided to sort out the two big doors in the barn (those on the right of the picture).
The problem with the doors is that they were rotten at the bottom. So last weekend, I took them out, chopped them up with my chainsaw, and then painted the beam from which they hung. The wood had rotted, because the doors went all the way down to the ground, and were affected by rainwater. So next I built a foundation, which aligns with that of the rest of the building. Then today I started with the first line of brickwork, leaving a gap in the middle for a more modest door. I salvaged a door from somewhere else in the barn, had a frame built for it, and then painted it. I will put it in and brick up around it.
I have also arranged for someone to come this week and take away that very ugly and environmentally incorrect red oil tank, and replace it with something more modern. Things are moving forward.
Walter Blotscher
The smug builder project is going well (he said smugly). It has been beautiful spring weather for the past week or so, so I decided to sort out the two big doors in the barn (those on the right of the picture).
The problem with the doors is that they were rotten at the bottom. So last weekend, I took them out, chopped them up with my chainsaw, and then painted the beam from which they hung. The wood had rotted, because the doors went all the way down to the ground, and were affected by rainwater. So next I built a foundation, which aligns with that of the rest of the building. Then today I started with the first line of brickwork, leaving a gap in the middle for a more modest door. I salvaged a door from somewhere else in the barn, had a frame built for it, and then painted it. I will put it in and brick up around it. I have also arranged for someone to come this week and take away that very ugly and environmentally incorrect red oil tank, and replace it with something more modern. Things are moving forward.
Walter Blotscher
Tuesday 22 March 2011
MUSIC IS SIMPLE
I have always liked classical music. My mother was a music teacher, and is a gifted pianist, so I probably got it from her. At school I learned to play the recorder and the bassoon, and was in the school and county youth orchestras. I can potter about on the piano, though with bad technique.
For many of my schoolfriends, classical music was weird; how could you like Bach if you liked Black Sabbath, Elgar if you liked the Eagles? Yet listen closely and you'll find that many of the structures underlying all types of music are in fact very similar. They all use the same limited number of notes, the same chords and chord progressions, and the same rhythms (mainly 3/4 and 4/4). That is why other music traditions that use different notescales and odd rhythms, sometimes seem difficult. I remember when I lived in Lesotho going to see a touring bunch of Indian musicians. Their rhythms and harmonies sounded so odd to my ear, that I had to leave, I couldn't handle it.
To illustrate my point, listen to the following video by the Axis of Awesome, which was part of this year's Comic Relief Red Nose Day. It shows not only how many pop songs are written with the same four chords, but with the same four chords in exactly the same order.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw3eYsnl31c
Enjoy. Then think about it the next time you listen to Mozart.
Walter Blotscher
I have always liked classical music. My mother was a music teacher, and is a gifted pianist, so I probably got it from her. At school I learned to play the recorder and the bassoon, and was in the school and county youth orchestras. I can potter about on the piano, though with bad technique.
For many of my schoolfriends, classical music was weird; how could you like Bach if you liked Black Sabbath, Elgar if you liked the Eagles? Yet listen closely and you'll find that many of the structures underlying all types of music are in fact very similar. They all use the same limited number of notes, the same chords and chord progressions, and the same rhythms (mainly 3/4 and 4/4). That is why other music traditions that use different notescales and odd rhythms, sometimes seem difficult. I remember when I lived in Lesotho going to see a touring bunch of Indian musicians. Their rhythms and harmonies sounded so odd to my ear, that I had to leave, I couldn't handle it.
To illustrate my point, listen to the following video by the Axis of Awesome, which was part of this year's Comic Relief Red Nose Day. It shows not only how many pop songs are written with the same four chords, but with the same four chords in exactly the same order.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw3eYsnl31c
Enjoy. Then think about it the next time you listen to Mozart.
Walter Blotscher
Monday 21 March 2011
LIBYA
I am worried about Libya. Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, I am not yet at the point where I unreservedly think it was the wrong decision; but I'll state my worries nonetheless.
Although the coalition of the willing have (in contrast to Iraq) managed to get their legal ducks lined up this time round, the U.N. resolution empowering a no-fly zone and the protection of civilians is nonetheless to a certain extent vague. It specifically rules out the use of an "occupying force". Does that however allow for ground troops that have no intention of occupying Libya? Special forces sent to carry out hit and run raids spring to mind.
When politicians, with President Sarkozy in the forefront, start talking about "moral duty" and "historic decisions", I begin to get twitchy. We should remember that less than three months ago, France's apparent moral duty was to offer the support of its special forces to the Tunisian Government, so that it could better suppress peaceful demonstrators. Changing tack is not necessarily a bad thing; but there is a danger of hasty overreaction in the opposite direction.
Colonel Gadaffi is undoubtedly a bad man. But he is certainly not the only Government leader in this world, to whom one could attach that label. Why is the world not operating a no-fly zone in (say) Ivory Coast, which already has U.N. peacekeepers on the ground? Or Zimbabwe? Or Belarus? The answers to the last two are probably that it is not possible, and that Russia would veto any proposed U.N. resolution. Does that mean, then, that Libya is "on" simply because it can be done from Europe, and the Colonel is not liked enough for someone to raise a veto at the U.N.? And if that is true, why are we talking about morality, when really it is a question of practicalities?
There have already been casualties from Cruise missile and air attacks. Are these all nasty, die-hard supporters of the regime, or have we already seen the first signs of "collateral damage", the euphemism for innocents being caught in the crossfire. Will there be much more of that sort of thing? Yes, almost certainly. How much more could there be before our "moral duty" starts to look tarnished? Nobody knows. Or, at least, nobody is saying.
As in other wars, we don't know many of the details. Yet this is a crisis, so the 24-hour news networks have to cover it relentlessly, including interviews with military types - either current or former - who can explain exactly what an F16 can do to a tank column and how. What unnerves me is the way these guys (and they are always guys) light up when it comes to talking about firepower, they look a bit like I did when I was 7 years old and desperately wanted a Johnny 7 for Christmas. Is there anyone with a restraining finger on these various buttons, or is it all gung-ho?
Finally, what is the end-game in all of this? Air power will ensure that Colonal Gaddafi can't reconquer and terrorise the east of his country. But that might simply leave the two halves fairly entrenched, and ready to settle down for the sort of low-level civil war that has plagued other African countries for so many years; remember that Rwanda didn't require tanks and planes, machetes and clubs were enough. Such a status quo might be unacceptable to the coalition powers, particularly if it resulted in a steady trickle of refugees fleeing across the Mediterranean from the fighting. Is there a danger of mission creep here?
I don't have the answers to all of these questions. However, I do have the answer to one. Am I worried? You bet.
Walter Blotscher
I am worried about Libya. Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, I am not yet at the point where I unreservedly think it was the wrong decision; but I'll state my worries nonetheless.
Although the coalition of the willing have (in contrast to Iraq) managed to get their legal ducks lined up this time round, the U.N. resolution empowering a no-fly zone and the protection of civilians is nonetheless to a certain extent vague. It specifically rules out the use of an "occupying force". Does that however allow for ground troops that have no intention of occupying Libya? Special forces sent to carry out hit and run raids spring to mind.
When politicians, with President Sarkozy in the forefront, start talking about "moral duty" and "historic decisions", I begin to get twitchy. We should remember that less than three months ago, France's apparent moral duty was to offer the support of its special forces to the Tunisian Government, so that it could better suppress peaceful demonstrators. Changing tack is not necessarily a bad thing; but there is a danger of hasty overreaction in the opposite direction.
Colonel Gadaffi is undoubtedly a bad man. But he is certainly not the only Government leader in this world, to whom one could attach that label. Why is the world not operating a no-fly zone in (say) Ivory Coast, which already has U.N. peacekeepers on the ground? Or Zimbabwe? Or Belarus? The answers to the last two are probably that it is not possible, and that Russia would veto any proposed U.N. resolution. Does that mean, then, that Libya is "on" simply because it can be done from Europe, and the Colonel is not liked enough for someone to raise a veto at the U.N.? And if that is true, why are we talking about morality, when really it is a question of practicalities?
There have already been casualties from Cruise missile and air attacks. Are these all nasty, die-hard supporters of the regime, or have we already seen the first signs of "collateral damage", the euphemism for innocents being caught in the crossfire. Will there be much more of that sort of thing? Yes, almost certainly. How much more could there be before our "moral duty" starts to look tarnished? Nobody knows. Or, at least, nobody is saying.
As in other wars, we don't know many of the details. Yet this is a crisis, so the 24-hour news networks have to cover it relentlessly, including interviews with military types - either current or former - who can explain exactly what an F16 can do to a tank column and how. What unnerves me is the way these guys (and they are always guys) light up when it comes to talking about firepower, they look a bit like I did when I was 7 years old and desperately wanted a Johnny 7 for Christmas. Is there anyone with a restraining finger on these various buttons, or is it all gung-ho?
Finally, what is the end-game in all of this? Air power will ensure that Colonal Gaddafi can't reconquer and terrorise the east of his country. But that might simply leave the two halves fairly entrenched, and ready to settle down for the sort of low-level civil war that has plagued other African countries for so many years; remember that Rwanda didn't require tanks and planes, machetes and clubs were enough. Such a status quo might be unacceptable to the coalition powers, particularly if it resulted in a steady trickle of refugees fleeing across the Mediterranean from the fighting. Is there a danger of mission creep here?
I don't have the answers to all of these questions. However, I do have the answer to one. Am I worried? You bet.
Walter Blotscher
Sunday 20 March 2011
MILAN-SAN REMO
The spring cycling classics traditionally get underway with yesterday's Milan-San Remo, one of the five monuments, or hardest races. In terms of difficulty, "La Classicissima" doesn't have the cobblestones of the Tour of Flanders and Paris-Roubaix, or the hills of Liege-Bastogne-Liege and the Tour of Lombardy. What it does have are length (at 298km, it is by far the longest one-day race, longer even than the World Championships), and a couple of short, sharp climbs just before the finish that thin out the leading group. Most teams' strategy is to help their sprinter over those climbs, so they are there to contest the finish. Sprinters had won in seven of the last ten years, and were favourite to win again this time round.
It didn't work out that way. A crash some 90km before the finish split the peloton in two, with most of the sprinter favourites in the second group. Since the front group had 44 people in it, it was not possible to chase it down, so the bunch that reached the last climb, the Poggio, with 10km to go, had different sorts of riders in it. Coming into San Remo, that group had been whittled down to eight. Matthew Goss, a young Australian and the last recognised sprinter in it, took the win ahead of Fabian Cancellara and Phillipe Gilbert. Cancellara had won in 2008 with a time-trial attack in the last kilometre, but had to settle for second this time around.
All eyes now move to Belgium and northern France for the Tour of Flanders and Paris-Roubaix. Can Cancellara repeat his double from last year? That would certainly seal his reputation as one of the greatest cyclists of modern times. He is certainly in form, and I wouldn't put it past him.
Walter Blotscher
The spring cycling classics traditionally get underway with yesterday's Milan-San Remo, one of the five monuments, or hardest races. In terms of difficulty, "La Classicissima" doesn't have the cobblestones of the Tour of Flanders and Paris-Roubaix, or the hills of Liege-Bastogne-Liege and the Tour of Lombardy. What it does have are length (at 298km, it is by far the longest one-day race, longer even than the World Championships), and a couple of short, sharp climbs just before the finish that thin out the leading group. Most teams' strategy is to help their sprinter over those climbs, so they are there to contest the finish. Sprinters had won in seven of the last ten years, and were favourite to win again this time round.
It didn't work out that way. A crash some 90km before the finish split the peloton in two, with most of the sprinter favourites in the second group. Since the front group had 44 people in it, it was not possible to chase it down, so the bunch that reached the last climb, the Poggio, with 10km to go, had different sorts of riders in it. Coming into San Remo, that group had been whittled down to eight. Matthew Goss, a young Australian and the last recognised sprinter in it, took the win ahead of Fabian Cancellara and Phillipe Gilbert. Cancellara had won in 2008 with a time-trial attack in the last kilometre, but had to settle for second this time around.
All eyes now move to Belgium and northern France for the Tour of Flanders and Paris-Roubaix. Can Cancellara repeat his double from last year? That would certainly seal his reputation as one of the greatest cyclists of modern times. He is certainly in form, and I wouldn't put it past him.
Walter Blotscher
Saturday 19 March 2011
MORE BELLS AND WHISTLES
My last IT-upgrade in January added a picture function on this blog. The eagle-eyed will have noticed more changes.
First, I have updated my profile, including a picture of myself, and adding a list of interests. I have "come out", as it were.
Secondly, I have joined Twitter, as you can see above. Not only that, but I have got my first Twitter followers. One of them I know; but with the other, I have absolutely no idea how they found their way to me, it is one of the mysteries of cyberspace. All the same, it was quite exciting.
My 16-year old (soon to be 17-year old) daughter, who has an unpaid job as one of my IT-advisers, tells me that Twitter is "nothing" in Denmark, Facebook is all. So I might just be being a pioneer.
Walter Blotscher
My last IT-upgrade in January added a picture function on this blog. The eagle-eyed will have noticed more changes.
First, I have updated my profile, including a picture of myself, and adding a list of interests. I have "come out", as it were.
Secondly, I have joined Twitter, as you can see above. Not only that, but I have got my first Twitter followers. One of them I know; but with the other, I have absolutely no idea how they found their way to me, it is one of the mysteries of cyberspace. All the same, it was quite exciting.
My 16-year old (soon to be 17-year old) daughter, who has an unpaid job as one of my IT-advisers, tells me that Twitter is "nothing" in Denmark, Facebook is all. So I might just be being a pioneer.
Walter Blotscher
Friday 18 March 2011
IVORY COAST (2)
While the world, through last night's Security Council resolution authorising a no-fly zone, appears to be doing something about the situation in Libya, a low-level civil war is going on in Ivory Coast. In my previous post on Ivory Coast in December, I said that it was important that international pressure be brought to bear on outgoing President Laurent Gbagbo, so that the winner of the recent election, opposition leader Alassane Ouattara, could take office. Although there have been lots of talks, including mediation by the African Union, Mr. Gbagbo has refused to budge. Meanwhile, his supporters are getting increasingly violent, provoking retaliation from those of Mr. Ouattara. More than 400 people have died since 28 November's disputed election, and an estimated 450,000 people driven from their homes. This is despite the fact that (in contrast to Libya) there are already 9,000 U.N. peacekeepers in the country, with a mandate to monitor the 2003 ceasefire, one of the pre-conditions that enabled the election to take place.
Various sanctions are in place against Mr. Gbagbo, and the West African central bank has handed over control of the national accounts to Mr. Ouattara. Without cash to pay supporters, particularly loyal units within the army, Mr. Gbagbo ought to be under pressure; yet there are rumours that other African "big men", notably President Jose dos Santos of Angola, are riding to his rescue by providing alternative resources. Whatever the truth of this, it is indisputably the case that Mr. Gbagbo has not yet stepped down, and that Mr. Ouattara spends most of his time holed up in a luxury hotel in Abidjan. A Government of national unity, though without Mr. Gbagbo himself, looks like the best way forward, and this plan has been approved by the African Union. But it hasn't happened yet.
The problems in Ivory Coast are probably at least as serious as those in Libya. Why then does one attract the world's attention while the other doesn't? "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" ought to be one of the guiding principles behind the way the United Nations works. Sadly, when it comes to events in sub-Saharan Africa (think Somalia, Rwanda, Congo), it doesn't seem to pan out that way.
Walter Blotscher
While the world, through last night's Security Council resolution authorising a no-fly zone, appears to be doing something about the situation in Libya, a low-level civil war is going on in Ivory Coast. In my previous post on Ivory Coast in December, I said that it was important that international pressure be brought to bear on outgoing President Laurent Gbagbo, so that the winner of the recent election, opposition leader Alassane Ouattara, could take office. Although there have been lots of talks, including mediation by the African Union, Mr. Gbagbo has refused to budge. Meanwhile, his supporters are getting increasingly violent, provoking retaliation from those of Mr. Ouattara. More than 400 people have died since 28 November's disputed election, and an estimated 450,000 people driven from their homes. This is despite the fact that (in contrast to Libya) there are already 9,000 U.N. peacekeepers in the country, with a mandate to monitor the 2003 ceasefire, one of the pre-conditions that enabled the election to take place.
Various sanctions are in place against Mr. Gbagbo, and the West African central bank has handed over control of the national accounts to Mr. Ouattara. Without cash to pay supporters, particularly loyal units within the army, Mr. Gbagbo ought to be under pressure; yet there are rumours that other African "big men", notably President Jose dos Santos of Angola, are riding to his rescue by providing alternative resources. Whatever the truth of this, it is indisputably the case that Mr. Gbagbo has not yet stepped down, and that Mr. Ouattara spends most of his time holed up in a luxury hotel in Abidjan. A Government of national unity, though without Mr. Gbagbo himself, looks like the best way forward, and this plan has been approved by the African Union. But it hasn't happened yet.
The problems in Ivory Coast are probably at least as serious as those in Libya. Why then does one attract the world's attention while the other doesn't? "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" ought to be one of the guiding principles behind the way the United Nations works. Sadly, when it comes to events in sub-Saharan Africa (think Somalia, Rwanda, Congo), it doesn't seem to pan out that way.
Walter Blotscher
Thursday 17 March 2011
DISAPPOINTING BOOKS
I have read a number of disappointing books during this first quarter of the year.
I really liked William Boyd's early novels, when they appeared at the beginning of the 1980's; A Good Man in Africa, An Ice-Cream War, and Stars and Bars. Brazzaville Beach, which appeared a decade later, was also good. Against that background, Ordinary Thunderstorms, a thriller about a man who inadvertently gets mixed up in shenanigans in the pharmaceutical industry and has to go underground in London, is rather pedestrian. It is also not half as good as John Le Carre's The Constant Gardener, which is on much the same theme.
Patricia Cornwell is a phenomenally successfully American writer of crime novels. Starting with Post Mortem in 1990, most of them feature Kay Scarpetta, a forensic scientist who tends to solve the various murders through detailed analysis of the crime scene and the victims' bodies. I had never read any of her twenty or so books, until my son picked up Book of the Dead in some airport bookshop. It was OK; but some of the forensic analysis went over my head, and I was never really gripped.
The Suspicions of Mr. Whicher, by Kate Summerscale, is a true story about the particularly brutal murder of a small child that took place at a country house in England in 1860. The case is historically interesting, since it was one of the first outside London investigated by the new phenomenon of "detectives", and as such, was covered extensively by the newspapers of the time, both local and national. The Metropolitan Police, the first in the country, was established for London by Sir Robert Peel in 1829; but it was not until 1842 that a small detective division was set up, with Jonathan Whicher one of the original eight members. He correctly worked out the identity of the murderer, the boy's elder half-sister, and how it had been done, but could not prove it in court (though she later entered a religious establishment and then confessed five years later). The combination of crime and history could have sparked together, but surprisingly fell a bit flat.
Finally, I didn't manage to get through Peter Ackroyd's book on Venice, perhaps my absolute favourite city. It takes quite a lot for me not to finish a book, once I have started it, and I loved Ackroyd's earlier novel Hawksmoor, so the disappointment was all the greater. Following on from his London: The Biography, Venice Pure City is written in the same sort of style, jumping around from one theme to another. I wish it had stayed still.
Good writing is difficult to define. I think it's just one of those things that you know when you see it. I have also just re-read Cormac McCarthy's No Country For Old Men after they showed the film on television. Now that is good writing.
Walter Blotscher
I have read a number of disappointing books during this first quarter of the year.
I really liked William Boyd's early novels, when they appeared at the beginning of the 1980's; A Good Man in Africa, An Ice-Cream War, and Stars and Bars. Brazzaville Beach, which appeared a decade later, was also good. Against that background, Ordinary Thunderstorms, a thriller about a man who inadvertently gets mixed up in shenanigans in the pharmaceutical industry and has to go underground in London, is rather pedestrian. It is also not half as good as John Le Carre's The Constant Gardener, which is on much the same theme.
Patricia Cornwell is a phenomenally successfully American writer of crime novels. Starting with Post Mortem in 1990, most of them feature Kay Scarpetta, a forensic scientist who tends to solve the various murders through detailed analysis of the crime scene and the victims' bodies. I had never read any of her twenty or so books, until my son picked up Book of the Dead in some airport bookshop. It was OK; but some of the forensic analysis went over my head, and I was never really gripped.
The Suspicions of Mr. Whicher, by Kate Summerscale, is a true story about the particularly brutal murder of a small child that took place at a country house in England in 1860. The case is historically interesting, since it was one of the first outside London investigated by the new phenomenon of "detectives", and as such, was covered extensively by the newspapers of the time, both local and national. The Metropolitan Police, the first in the country, was established for London by Sir Robert Peel in 1829; but it was not until 1842 that a small detective division was set up, with Jonathan Whicher one of the original eight members. He correctly worked out the identity of the murderer, the boy's elder half-sister, and how it had been done, but could not prove it in court (though she later entered a religious establishment and then confessed five years later). The combination of crime and history could have sparked together, but surprisingly fell a bit flat.
Finally, I didn't manage to get through Peter Ackroyd's book on Venice, perhaps my absolute favourite city. It takes quite a lot for me not to finish a book, once I have started it, and I loved Ackroyd's earlier novel Hawksmoor, so the disappointment was all the greater. Following on from his London: The Biography, Venice Pure City is written in the same sort of style, jumping around from one theme to another. I wish it had stayed still.
Good writing is difficult to define. I think it's just one of those things that you know when you see it. I have also just re-read Cormac McCarthy's No Country For Old Men after they showed the film on television. Now that is good writing.
Walter Blotscher
Wednesday 16 March 2011
MY DAUGHTER'S COOKING
My wife is on an exchange visit with her school in Poland this week, so I am alone at home with my daughter.
It was her turn to cook this evening, though I did the shopping for the ingredients. She made a salmon lasagne, with leeks, carrots, onions, spinach, and a cheese and tomato topping. It was delicious.
She also made a very large portion. So that's what we'll be having when it's my turn to cook tomorrow night.
Walter Blotscher
My wife is on an exchange visit with her school in Poland this week, so I am alone at home with my daughter.
It was her turn to cook this evening, though I did the shopping for the ingredients. She made a salmon lasagne, with leeks, carrots, onions, spinach, and a cheese and tomato topping. It was delicious.
She also made a very large portion. So that's what we'll be having when it's my turn to cook tomorrow night.
Walter Blotscher
Tuesday 15 March 2011
NUCLEAR POWER IN EUROPE (2)
As I feared would be the case, the official death toll from Friday's earthquake in Japan (not the quake itself, but the subsequent tsunami) has risen sharply, and now stands at about 2,400. Many people think that it will end up a lot higher. Whatever the number, the earthquake was a catastrophe for the country, with widespread devastation and over 500,000 people made homeless.
The other likely casualty from the event is any future expansion of nuclear power, particularly in Europe. The earthquake and subsequent aftershocks have caused at least three explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, situated on the coast some 250km north of Tokyo and right in the middle of the zone "severely" affected by the earthquake. Radiation is leaking out, leading to an evacuation of everybody within 20km of the plant, and a no-fly zone in the airspace. The incidents are already the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl, and may yet get worse. They have also provoked a swift reaction elsewhere. Germany, which voted as recently as last autumn to extend the life of its nuclear plants, has now put that decision on hold, pending an analysis of what happened in Japan; so too has Switzerland. Plans for new plants look decidedly less likely than they did a week ago.
It is true that Japan - in contrast to Europe - is a particularly vulnerable country for the siting of a nuclear reactor, since it sits right on the edge of the so-called Ring of Fire in the Pacific Ocean. Yet because of that, it also has probably the highest proportion of earthquake-resistant buildings in the world. It also has a huge need for nuclear power, since it has not one drop of fossil fuel of its own, and must import the lot, a position that may well come under strain during the next 50 years. Put bluntly, if the safety of nuclear power can't be accepted in Japan with its notoriously stoic population, then it probably can't be accepted anywhere. Not least in Germany, where there is a strong anti-nuclear movement, who were out in force in the streets this weekend.
In a world desperate to find ways of reducing its reliance on fossil fuel, a de facto moratorium on nuclear energy will inevitably have profound consequences. Not least for our wallets.
Walter Blotscher
As I feared would be the case, the official death toll from Friday's earthquake in Japan (not the quake itself, but the subsequent tsunami) has risen sharply, and now stands at about 2,400. Many people think that it will end up a lot higher. Whatever the number, the earthquake was a catastrophe for the country, with widespread devastation and over 500,000 people made homeless.
The other likely casualty from the event is any future expansion of nuclear power, particularly in Europe. The earthquake and subsequent aftershocks have caused at least three explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, situated on the coast some 250km north of Tokyo and right in the middle of the zone "severely" affected by the earthquake. Radiation is leaking out, leading to an evacuation of everybody within 20km of the plant, and a no-fly zone in the airspace. The incidents are already the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl, and may yet get worse. They have also provoked a swift reaction elsewhere. Germany, which voted as recently as last autumn to extend the life of its nuclear plants, has now put that decision on hold, pending an analysis of what happened in Japan; so too has Switzerland. Plans for new plants look decidedly less likely than they did a week ago.
It is true that Japan - in contrast to Europe - is a particularly vulnerable country for the siting of a nuclear reactor, since it sits right on the edge of the so-called Ring of Fire in the Pacific Ocean. Yet because of that, it also has probably the highest proportion of earthquake-resistant buildings in the world. It also has a huge need for nuclear power, since it has not one drop of fossil fuel of its own, and must import the lot, a position that may well come under strain during the next 50 years. Put bluntly, if the safety of nuclear power can't be accepted in Japan with its notoriously stoic population, then it probably can't be accepted anywhere. Not least in Germany, where there is a strong anti-nuclear movement, who were out in force in the streets this weekend.
In a world desperate to find ways of reducing its reliance on fossil fuel, a de facto moratorium on nuclear energy will inevitably have profound consequences. Not least for our wallets.
Walter Blotscher
Monday 14 March 2011
VISITING COPENHAGEN
My elder son turned 21 last weekend; many congratulations to him. We had intended to do something with him to celebrate this milestone; but he is a busy bee these days, so it had to wait.
On Friday I went up to Copenhagen to see him. We drank beer at the pub where he works, and then I took him out to dinner at a cafe near where he lives. I had a terrific steak, which I mention, since I don't eat much meat these days (my daughter being a vegetarian). I slept overnight in his room, and in the morning he made me a huge breakfast of bacon and eggs (ditto).
My son was buzzing with energy and exuberance. He is full of activities and plans and events and hopes, what you would expect to see in a young man with the future ahead of him. It was great to see. Must be all that meat ...
Walter Blotscher
My elder son turned 21 last weekend; many congratulations to him. We had intended to do something with him to celebrate this milestone; but he is a busy bee these days, so it had to wait.
On Friday I went up to Copenhagen to see him. We drank beer at the pub where he works, and then I took him out to dinner at a cafe near where he lives. I had a terrific steak, which I mention, since I don't eat much meat these days (my daughter being a vegetarian). I slept overnight in his room, and in the morning he made me a huge breakfast of bacon and eggs (ditto).
My son was buzzing with energy and exuberance. He is full of activities and plans and events and hopes, what you would expect to see in a young man with the future ahead of him. It was great to see. Must be all that meat ...
Walter Blotscher
Sunday 13 March 2011
ENGLAND v. SCOTLAND
England maintained the possibility of winning a Grand Slam in rugby's Six Nations Championship by beating Scotland 22-16 at Twickenham this afternoon. It was a scrappy match, in which Scotland played their underdog spoiler role to perfection. But England had just enough muscle to win through in the end. Now only Ireland in Dublin to beat.
I watched the match on my p2p file-sharing link. Often these crash midway through something interesting, and you have to reboot them again. Today, however, it was perfect sound and video all the way through. I still don't know how they do it; but until Danish television starts showing rugby, I am not going to complain.
Walter Blotscher
England maintained the possibility of winning a Grand Slam in rugby's Six Nations Championship by beating Scotland 22-16 at Twickenham this afternoon. It was a scrappy match, in which Scotland played their underdog spoiler role to perfection. But England had just enough muscle to win through in the end. Now only Ireland in Dublin to beat.
I watched the match on my p2p file-sharing link. Often these crash midway through something interesting, and you have to reboot them again. Today, however, it was perfect sound and video all the way through. I still don't know how they do it; but until Danish television starts showing rugby, I am not going to complain.
Walter Blotscher
Friday 11 March 2011
EARTHQUAKE IN JAPAN
In my post reviewing the year 2010 I said that one of the themes was the recurrent power of Nature, which remains more than a match for humanity's ingenuity and technological progress.
This morning's earthquake and tsunami in Japan prove my point. The earthquake, measured at 8.9 on the Richter scale, is reckoned to be one of the five biggest ever recorded. And although loss of life - so far - appears to be modest, the tsunami rushing across the Pacific Ocean as I write may well change that.
It is a sobering event.
Walter Blotscher
In my post reviewing the year 2010 I said that one of the themes was the recurrent power of Nature, which remains more than a match for humanity's ingenuity and technological progress.
This morning's earthquake and tsunami in Japan prove my point. The earthquake, measured at 8.9 on the Richter scale, is reckoned to be one of the five biggest ever recorded. And although loss of life - so far - appears to be modest, the tsunami rushing across the Pacific Ocean as I write may well change that.
It is a sobering event.
Walter Blotscher
Thursday 10 March 2011
TWO GOOD FILMS
I have seen two good films in the cinema during the past week.
On Sunday I went with my wife and daughter to see The King's Speech in Odense. The film cleaned up at this year's Oscars, winning best film, best director and best actor. It's a simple tale of a man's struggle against adversity, the adversity being a stammer and the man being King George VI, thrust into the role against his will by the 1936 abdication of his elder brother Edward VIII. I really enjoyed it.
Tonight I went with my daughter to see The Social Network at the local cinema. This is about the founding of Facebook, which - remarkably - didn't exist until the beginning of 2004 and now has hundreds of millions of members, myself included. Mark Zuckerberg is obviously a brilliant computer geek, and his idea (if, indeed, it really was his idea) quickly made him the world's youngest billionaire. But if the film is true, then he also screwed his one real friend in the process, which doesn't make him very endearing. Compelling to watch in a slightly repellant way.
Walter Blotscher
I have seen two good films in the cinema during the past week.
On Sunday I went with my wife and daughter to see The King's Speech in Odense. The film cleaned up at this year's Oscars, winning best film, best director and best actor. It's a simple tale of a man's struggle against adversity, the adversity being a stammer and the man being King George VI, thrust into the role against his will by the 1936 abdication of his elder brother Edward VIII. I really enjoyed it.
Tonight I went with my daughter to see The Social Network at the local cinema. This is about the founding of Facebook, which - remarkably - didn't exist until the beginning of 2004 and now has hundreds of millions of members, myself included. Mark Zuckerberg is obviously a brilliant computer geek, and his idea (if, indeed, it really was his idea) quickly made him the world's youngest billionaire. But if the film is true, then he also screwed his one real friend in the process, which doesn't make him very endearing. Compelling to watch in a slightly repellant way.
Walter Blotscher
Wednesday 9 March 2011
IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION
Readers of this blog will know that during the past decade, Denmark has moved under a right-of-centre minority government from being a liberal social democracy, tolerant of foreigners, to the E.U. country with possibly the tightest restrictions on immigration. The very right-wing Danish People's Party has brilliantly exploited its pivotal role by giving Parliamentary support to the Government in order to provide a working majority for legislative proposals in exchange for a progressive tightening of the rules on refugees, asyslum seekers and other undesirables, all cloaked in a rhetoric of anti-Muslim, pro-Danish nationalism.
Readers of this blog will also know that I consider this a bad thing. Partly because I myself am an immigrant, and have children who come from two cultures (successfully, in my view), so I consider the whole premise rather offensive. But also because I see it as Canute-like in its futility. Everybody agrees that in 20 years or so (and, in some areas, already now), Denmark will face severe labour shortages, paticularly in "care" services; and the only possible solution to those labour shortages will be to import labour, most likely from poorer, browner and more Muslim countries. Furthermore, while the DPP is actively trying to bolt the stable doors to the outside world, rich and infertile Danish couples are actively undermining the whole stable gene pool by merrily adopting babies from China, Vietnam, Columbia, Africa and elsewhere. These children will grow up completely Danish, but will not look anything like "Danes". So the DPP concept of "Danishness" is simply not one that can be maintained in the future.
(An interesting side note. The one institution that has worked all this out is, perhaps surprisingly, the one that is supposedly the most representative of Danishness, namely the monarchy. The current queen is half Swedish, and she married a Frenchman. Her elder son married a Tasmanian, and her younger son two women in succession, one half English, half Chinese, and the other French-Swiss. All of which means that the next king but one will be - at most - one eighth ethnic Danish. Yet this has not made the monarchy in any way unpopular, the exact opposite in fact.)
Against that background, yesterday saw some dramatic changes. The first was the sacking (itself unusual) of Birthe Rønn Hornbech as Integration Minister, and her replacement by Søren Pind. Denmark is a signatory to two U.N. conventions that give stateless persons up to the age of 21, who are born and raised in Denmark, the automatic right to Danish citizenship. This covers people without a state, such as Palestinians, but also a handful of others who for various reasons are stateless. It turns out that under Ms Rønn Hornbech's two predecessors, the Ministry refused around 30 applications from Palestinians for Danish citizenship, even though these people had an automatic right to it. Since the conventions are pretty clear (and, if there was any doubt, the U.N. could easily have clarified matters), this was bad enough. The real problem was that after Ms Rønn Hornbech discovered the situation in 2008, the policy continued. Parliament was not told of what had happened until early 2010; and although the affected people have now had their cases taken up again, the inevitable questions about "who knew what, when?", coupled with leaks and counter-leaks from the Ministry, have dominated political debate here for the past couple of months. The Prime Minister demanded a review of the whole saga, which Ms Rønn Hornbech delivered on Sunday. At a stormy meeting to discuss it the following day, she apparently heaped all blame on her two predecessors, and saw no reason to resign. The Prime Minister saw otherwise, and fired her. There will now be a formal independent investigation headed by a judge.
Mr Pind (who will run the Integration Ministry in tandem with his previous job of Aid Minister) comes from the libertarian wing of the dominant coalition Venstre party, and is viewed in many quarters as a bit of a young, ideological hothead. In his first Ministerial statement in his new job, he was true to form. Integration has failed, and should be replaced by "assimilation" he said. Danish culture was being undermined, and this should stop. If you don't want to become Danish, then you should "stay away". All this points to a further tightening of the immigration rules, even though most people, even right of centre voters, think that they are already tough enough.
Yet on the same day that Mr Pind appeared to be signalling an intention to take Danish immigration policy in an ever more rightward direction, the whole basis for that policy was being undermined by the European Court of Justice's judgment in the Belgian case of Ruiz Zambrano. In 1999 Mr Ruiz Zambrano, a Columbian national, came to Belgium and applied for asylum. A year later, his wife and small son came and applied for refugee status. These were both refused and they were ordered to leave the country; however, it was accepted that they should not be sent back to Columbia, owing to the civil war then going on. In particular, Mr Ruiz Zambrano had suffered from post-traumatic stress syndrome after his son had been kidnapped for a week. Over the next couple of years, Mr Ruiz Zambrano got a job and the couple tried to have their status regularised, but to no avail. Crucially, they also had two more children, who were given Belgian nationality. When Mr Ruiz Zambrano lost his job, he applied for unemployment benefit, which was refused, on the grounds that as a foreigner, he had not worked enough days to entitle him to it. He was also refused a work permit. Mr Ruiz Zambrano went to court; and it was a reference from this case, that the ECJ had to rule on.
E.U. citizenship was introduced by the 1992 Maastricht Treaty; everyone who is a national of a Member State is automatically a European citizen. It is for the individual Member State to decide for itself about nationality; but once it has so decided, then the rules about European citizenship apply. In a series of landmark cases, the ECJ has interpreted those rules very broadly, on the basis (repeated in Ruiz Zambrano) that "citizenship of the Union is intended to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States". In particular, Member States have to ensure that the rights of E.U. citizens are real rights, not illusionary ones. In the Ruiz Zambrano case, the E.U. citizens are the two children born in Belgium with Belgian nationality. If their parents are denied work and residence permits and/or unemployment benefits, then the result would be that they would not be able to support their children in Belgium and would have to leave the E.U. Since a forced departure from the E.U. would be a fundamental restriction on the children's right of citizenship to reside in the E.U., logic dictates that the parents must be allowed those permits and benefits.
This decision, a strong and clear decision issued by the Grand Chamber, will drive a coach and horses through much of the Danish Government's immigration policy. In particular, the so-called "24-year rule", whereby Danes wishing to marry people from outside the E.U. (read poor countries) cannot do so until the prospective spouse is 24 years old (unless they go and live in another, more welcoming, E.U. country such as Sweden first). Secondly, the newly formulated "points system", by which prospective immigrants are vetted as suitable for coming to the country. In both cases, if a Danish (and therefore E.U.) citizen is involved, such restrictions are illegal under E.U. law. Proof of that fact comes from the DPP's legal spokesman, who is already calling for immigration decisions to be decided in Denmark, who should be "master in its own house". This is, in effect, a call for abandonment of the E.U. Treaties; which - fortunately - ain't on.
All in all, a good start to the week for those opposed to rabid nationalism. Which includes me.
Walter Blotscher
Readers of this blog will know that during the past decade, Denmark has moved under a right-of-centre minority government from being a liberal social democracy, tolerant of foreigners, to the E.U. country with possibly the tightest restrictions on immigration. The very right-wing Danish People's Party has brilliantly exploited its pivotal role by giving Parliamentary support to the Government in order to provide a working majority for legislative proposals in exchange for a progressive tightening of the rules on refugees, asyslum seekers and other undesirables, all cloaked in a rhetoric of anti-Muslim, pro-Danish nationalism.
Readers of this blog will also know that I consider this a bad thing. Partly because I myself am an immigrant, and have children who come from two cultures (successfully, in my view), so I consider the whole premise rather offensive. But also because I see it as Canute-like in its futility. Everybody agrees that in 20 years or so (and, in some areas, already now), Denmark will face severe labour shortages, paticularly in "care" services; and the only possible solution to those labour shortages will be to import labour, most likely from poorer, browner and more Muslim countries. Furthermore, while the DPP is actively trying to bolt the stable doors to the outside world, rich and infertile Danish couples are actively undermining the whole stable gene pool by merrily adopting babies from China, Vietnam, Columbia, Africa and elsewhere. These children will grow up completely Danish, but will not look anything like "Danes". So the DPP concept of "Danishness" is simply not one that can be maintained in the future.
(An interesting side note. The one institution that has worked all this out is, perhaps surprisingly, the one that is supposedly the most representative of Danishness, namely the monarchy. The current queen is half Swedish, and she married a Frenchman. Her elder son married a Tasmanian, and her younger son two women in succession, one half English, half Chinese, and the other French-Swiss. All of which means that the next king but one will be - at most - one eighth ethnic Danish. Yet this has not made the monarchy in any way unpopular, the exact opposite in fact.)
Against that background, yesterday saw some dramatic changes. The first was the sacking (itself unusual) of Birthe Rønn Hornbech as Integration Minister, and her replacement by Søren Pind. Denmark is a signatory to two U.N. conventions that give stateless persons up to the age of 21, who are born and raised in Denmark, the automatic right to Danish citizenship. This covers people without a state, such as Palestinians, but also a handful of others who for various reasons are stateless. It turns out that under Ms Rønn Hornbech's two predecessors, the Ministry refused around 30 applications from Palestinians for Danish citizenship, even though these people had an automatic right to it. Since the conventions are pretty clear (and, if there was any doubt, the U.N. could easily have clarified matters), this was bad enough. The real problem was that after Ms Rønn Hornbech discovered the situation in 2008, the policy continued. Parliament was not told of what had happened until early 2010; and although the affected people have now had their cases taken up again, the inevitable questions about "who knew what, when?", coupled with leaks and counter-leaks from the Ministry, have dominated political debate here for the past couple of months. The Prime Minister demanded a review of the whole saga, which Ms Rønn Hornbech delivered on Sunday. At a stormy meeting to discuss it the following day, she apparently heaped all blame on her two predecessors, and saw no reason to resign. The Prime Minister saw otherwise, and fired her. There will now be a formal independent investigation headed by a judge.
Mr Pind (who will run the Integration Ministry in tandem with his previous job of Aid Minister) comes from the libertarian wing of the dominant coalition Venstre party, and is viewed in many quarters as a bit of a young, ideological hothead. In his first Ministerial statement in his new job, he was true to form. Integration has failed, and should be replaced by "assimilation" he said. Danish culture was being undermined, and this should stop. If you don't want to become Danish, then you should "stay away". All this points to a further tightening of the immigration rules, even though most people, even right of centre voters, think that they are already tough enough.
Yet on the same day that Mr Pind appeared to be signalling an intention to take Danish immigration policy in an ever more rightward direction, the whole basis for that policy was being undermined by the European Court of Justice's judgment in the Belgian case of Ruiz Zambrano. In 1999 Mr Ruiz Zambrano, a Columbian national, came to Belgium and applied for asylum. A year later, his wife and small son came and applied for refugee status. These were both refused and they were ordered to leave the country; however, it was accepted that they should not be sent back to Columbia, owing to the civil war then going on. In particular, Mr Ruiz Zambrano had suffered from post-traumatic stress syndrome after his son had been kidnapped for a week. Over the next couple of years, Mr Ruiz Zambrano got a job and the couple tried to have their status regularised, but to no avail. Crucially, they also had two more children, who were given Belgian nationality. When Mr Ruiz Zambrano lost his job, he applied for unemployment benefit, which was refused, on the grounds that as a foreigner, he had not worked enough days to entitle him to it. He was also refused a work permit. Mr Ruiz Zambrano went to court; and it was a reference from this case, that the ECJ had to rule on.
E.U. citizenship was introduced by the 1992 Maastricht Treaty; everyone who is a national of a Member State is automatically a European citizen. It is for the individual Member State to decide for itself about nationality; but once it has so decided, then the rules about European citizenship apply. In a series of landmark cases, the ECJ has interpreted those rules very broadly, on the basis (repeated in Ruiz Zambrano) that "citizenship of the Union is intended to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States". In particular, Member States have to ensure that the rights of E.U. citizens are real rights, not illusionary ones. In the Ruiz Zambrano case, the E.U. citizens are the two children born in Belgium with Belgian nationality. If their parents are denied work and residence permits and/or unemployment benefits, then the result would be that they would not be able to support their children in Belgium and would have to leave the E.U. Since a forced departure from the E.U. would be a fundamental restriction on the children's right of citizenship to reside in the E.U., logic dictates that the parents must be allowed those permits and benefits.
This decision, a strong and clear decision issued by the Grand Chamber, will drive a coach and horses through much of the Danish Government's immigration policy. In particular, the so-called "24-year rule", whereby Danes wishing to marry people from outside the E.U. (read poor countries) cannot do so until the prospective spouse is 24 years old (unless they go and live in another, more welcoming, E.U. country such as Sweden first). Secondly, the newly formulated "points system", by which prospective immigrants are vetted as suitable for coming to the country. In both cases, if a Danish (and therefore E.U.) citizen is involved, such restrictions are illegal under E.U. law. Proof of that fact comes from the DPP's legal spokesman, who is already calling for immigration decisions to be decided in Denmark, who should be "master in its own house". This is, in effect, a call for abandonment of the E.U. Treaties; which - fortunately - ain't on.
All in all, a good start to the week for those opposed to rabid nationalism. Which includes me.
Walter Blotscher
Tuesday 8 March 2011
ARAB DEMOCRACY (3)
In my earlier post on events in the Arab world, I said that I didn't think that things would pan out in the same way as they had in Eastern Europe at the end of the 1980's.
That hunch seems to have been correct. Although both Tunisia's and Egypt's Presidents have been forced out of office, it is still unclear how the two countries will find their way to democracy, if indeed they will. While in Libya, a full-scale civil war appears to be breaking out between the western half of the country, controlled by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi from Tripoli, and the eastern half, which has fallen to people who started out as demonstrators, but who are now fully-fledged rebels. With the rest of the world looking on from the sidelines, with or without a mooted no-fly zone, the outcome of that fight is far from certain.
Two months on, I am still not optimistic that the Arab world - in general - will become democratic any time soon.
Walter Blotscher
In my earlier post on events in the Arab world, I said that I didn't think that things would pan out in the same way as they had in Eastern Europe at the end of the 1980's.
That hunch seems to have been correct. Although both Tunisia's and Egypt's Presidents have been forced out of office, it is still unclear how the two countries will find their way to democracy, if indeed they will. While in Libya, a full-scale civil war appears to be breaking out between the western half of the country, controlled by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi from Tripoli, and the eastern half, which has fallen to people who started out as demonstrators, but who are now fully-fledged rebels. With the rest of the world looking on from the sidelines, with or without a mooted no-fly zone, the outcome of that fight is far from certain.
Two months on, I am still not optimistic that the Arab world - in general - will become democratic any time soon.
Walter Blotscher
Monday 7 March 2011
CROSS-COUNTRY SKIING
Why are the Norwegians so good at cross-country skiing? In the recent world championships, by coincidence held on home turf in Oslo, they dominated.
In the women's competition, they won five of the six events, with Marit Bjoergen taking gold in the sprint, 15 km pursuit, and 10km classic, and a silver, behind teammate Therese Johaug, in the 30km freestyle. They were also both part of the winning 4 x 5km relay team, and Johaug won a bronze elsewhere. The only event not won by Norway was the team sprint, where they came third.
In the men's competition Petter Northug won gold in the 30km pursuit and 50km freestyle, and silver in the sprint, while other team members were second and third in the 15km classic. Norway were always going to win the 4 x 10km relay; they also came second in the team sprint.
It must help if there are 100,000 compatriots camping out overnight in order to cheer you on as you glide past. But this was a phenomenal all-round performance. I know that there are lots of hills and snow in Norway, which must breed cross-country skills at an early age; but there are also lots of hills and snow in other countries, next door Sweden for example. One can only admire.
Walter Blotscher
Why are the Norwegians so good at cross-country skiing? In the recent world championships, by coincidence held on home turf in Oslo, they dominated.
In the women's competition, they won five of the six events, with Marit Bjoergen taking gold in the sprint, 15 km pursuit, and 10km classic, and a silver, behind teammate Therese Johaug, in the 30km freestyle. They were also both part of the winning 4 x 5km relay team, and Johaug won a bronze elsewhere. The only event not won by Norway was the team sprint, where they came third.
In the men's competition Petter Northug won gold in the 30km pursuit and 50km freestyle, and silver in the sprint, while other team members were second and third in the 15km classic. Norway were always going to win the 4 x 10km relay; they also came second in the team sprint.
It must help if there are 100,000 compatriots camping out overnight in order to cheer you on as you glide past. But this was a phenomenal all-round performance. I know that there are lots of hills and snow in Norway, which must breed cross-country skills at an early age; but there are also lots of hills and snow in other countries, next door Sweden for example. One can only admire.
Walter Blotscher
Sunday 6 March 2011
MOLE WARFARE (6)
In an earlier post, one commentator asked for more details about the various battlegrounds with the Mole Army, including a map. So, here they come.
Here is the house, as seen from the road, with the newly roofed middle building and the big beech tree in the background.
And here is the Mole Army's view from the compost heap, looking north east to the barn, the back of the middle building, and the big beech tree.
Last summer I cleared the area between the house and the wood on the right of trees. Between now and 1 May, a man will come with a machine and chew up all the ground, together with the remaining tree stumps and tree roots. I will then sow grass and perhaps a couple of cherry trees.
This is looking from the north east towards the back of the barn (the big beech tree is on my right). As part of the Smug Builder project, I have bricked up the four outlets, where the pigs used to run in and out, and have built a door opening. You can also just about see the foundation, which I rendered yesterday afternoon. Later this year, I will paint the barn, so that it is the same as the middle building on the right.
This is the edge of the cleared area, looking south west at the compost heap, Mole Army HQ. The orchard is off to the left, and the fallen apple tree and paddock are in the background.
Note the evidence of warfare in the foreground, the front line of trenches.
The rather Somme-like ground in amongst the orchard.
I have beaten a tactical retreat here, while I sort out the cleared area closer to the house.
The fallen apple tree, and the Mole Army's supply line up from the paddock into the compost heap on the right.
This is low-lying and swampy, which is why the tree collapsed. Perhaps I should break up the supply line by building a pond?
The flat area in the near background is where I am going to build the kitchen garden, this year's new project. But I have to clear out the moles from under the compost heap first.
Walter Blotscher
In an earlier post, one commentator asked for more details about the various battlegrounds with the Mole Army, including a map. So, here they come.
Here is the house, as seen from the road, with the newly roofed middle building and the big beech tree in the background.And here is the Mole Army's view from the compost heap, looking north east to the barn, the back of the middle building, and the big beech tree.
Last summer I cleared the area between the house and the wood on the right of trees. Between now and 1 May, a man will come with a machine and chew up all the ground, together with the remaining tree stumps and tree roots. I will then sow grass and perhaps a couple of cherry trees.
Note the evidence of warfare in the foreground, the front line of trenches.
I have beaten a tactical retreat here, while I sort out the cleared area closer to the house.
This is low-lying and swampy, which is why the tree collapsed. Perhaps I should break up the supply line by building a pond?
The flat area in the near background is where I am going to build the kitchen garden, this year's new project. But I have to clear out the moles from under the compost heap first.
Walter Blotscher
Saturday 5 March 2011
RITTERSPORT
Rittersport chocolate bars, made by Alfred Witter GmbH in Waldenbuch, south of Stuttgart, are in my view the best chocolate bars in the world. The 4x4, 16-chunk, square bars are made in a lot of different flavours; but the best are the ones in the brown wrapper, milk chocolate with whole hazelnuts.
I was reminded of this today when I bought one this afternoon at the local supermarket. It was a beautifully cold but sunny spring day, and I was rendering the foundation of the barn. A whole Rittersport was just what was needed to keep my spirits up.
Walter Blotscher
Rittersport chocolate bars, made by Alfred Witter GmbH in Waldenbuch, south of Stuttgart, are in my view the best chocolate bars in the world. The 4x4, 16-chunk, square bars are made in a lot of different flavours; but the best are the ones in the brown wrapper, milk chocolate with whole hazelnuts.
I was reminded of this today when I bought one this afternoon at the local supermarket. It was a beautifully cold but sunny spring day, and I was rendering the foundation of the barn. A whole Rittersport was just what was needed to keep my spirits up.
Walter Blotscher
Friday 4 March 2011
CONTINENTAL TEA
This is going to irritate some people, but the fact of the matter is that continentals just don't know how to make tea.
Continentals. What a wonderfully pejorative English word, summing up a millennium of island prejudice! A famous, though probably apocryphal, 19th century newspaper headline was "Fog in Channel; Continent Cut Off". That gives a good idea of where British people view the centre of the European land mass. It's an open question whether Ireland, another island on the edge of Europe, should be lumped in with the continentals or not. If tea is anything to go by, probably not, since they make it as we do.
As I say, tea is not good on the continent. How many times have you been in a cafe or hotel, even good or very good cafes and hotels, and been presented with a cup of hot water with a tea bag hanging miserably over the edge? In Denmark they use a big long thing that looks remarkably like a condom, and which is just as yukky after use. My wife, a big tea drinker, has accepted after years of badgering from me that this object is not a good idea, and now religiously buys vast quantities of Yorkshire tea (fresh from all those Yorkshire tea estates?) whenever she visits the U.K.
The proper way to make tea is to start with a proper teapot. Teabags are OK, but fresh tea leaves are even better. One teaspoon per person and one for the pot is the saying from my childhood ringing in my ears. Then you let it brew. Meanwhile, you prepare a separate pot of hot water, which will top up the tea after the first round of pourings. If you don't like tea leaves getting in your teeth, then you can pour the liquid into your cup through a tea strainer. Personally, I like using my teeth, since you end up with a pattern in the bottom, which can be "read". My Aunty Betty, not a real aunt but my brother's godmother, used to read tea leaves, one of the reasons why visiting her was always quite exciting.
I don't know why this is so difficult for continentals, since they have no problems with coffee. Like the absence of Marmite and Branston Pickle, it is all a bit of a puzzle.
Walter Blotscher
This is going to irritate some people, but the fact of the matter is that continentals just don't know how to make tea.
Continentals. What a wonderfully pejorative English word, summing up a millennium of island prejudice! A famous, though probably apocryphal, 19th century newspaper headline was "Fog in Channel; Continent Cut Off". That gives a good idea of where British people view the centre of the European land mass. It's an open question whether Ireland, another island on the edge of Europe, should be lumped in with the continentals or not. If tea is anything to go by, probably not, since they make it as we do.
As I say, tea is not good on the continent. How many times have you been in a cafe or hotel, even good or very good cafes and hotels, and been presented with a cup of hot water with a tea bag hanging miserably over the edge? In Denmark they use a big long thing that looks remarkably like a condom, and which is just as yukky after use. My wife, a big tea drinker, has accepted after years of badgering from me that this object is not a good idea, and now religiously buys vast quantities of Yorkshire tea (fresh from all those Yorkshire tea estates?) whenever she visits the U.K.
The proper way to make tea is to start with a proper teapot. Teabags are OK, but fresh tea leaves are even better. One teaspoon per person and one for the pot is the saying from my childhood ringing in my ears. Then you let it brew. Meanwhile, you prepare a separate pot of hot water, which will top up the tea after the first round of pourings. If you don't like tea leaves getting in your teeth, then you can pour the liquid into your cup through a tea strainer. Personally, I like using my teeth, since you end up with a pattern in the bottom, which can be "read". My Aunty Betty, not a real aunt but my brother's godmother, used to read tea leaves, one of the reasons why visiting her was always quite exciting.
I don't know why this is so difficult for continentals, since they have no problems with coffee. Like the absence of Marmite and Branston Pickle, it is all a bit of a puzzle.
Walter Blotscher
Thursday 3 March 2011
INSURANCE AND GENDER
Every now and then courts deliver a bombshell, that affects all of our lives. This week the European Court of Justice did just that.
The ECJ held that insurers cannot by law charge different rates for men and women, since this is discriminatory under E.U. law. This ruling, which takes effect from 21 December 2012 so that the insurance industry has time to adapt its pricing models, will have at least two wide effects. The first is that car insurance premiums, which are generally higher for men than for women, will equalise, either reducing for men and/or rising for women. The second is that annuities, a sort of pension, where, in return for a fixed sum of money, the pensioner receives a guaranteed income for the rest of his/her life, will also equalise, in general through giving men a lower annual income (since men live shorter lives, a lump-sum payment of £xx,000 currently gives them a greater annual income than women in the same position). These changes will affect milions of people across the whole of Europe.
This is not the first time that the ECJ has dropped a bombshell like this. Its 1990 ruling, in the famous case of Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange, had similarly dramatic effects on occupational pension schemes. GRE ran a typical scheme, in which men retired at 62 and women at 57. On redundancy, scheme members could obtain an immediate pension income at 55 for men, and 50 for women. Mr. Barber was made redundant at the age of 52, and obtained normal statutory benefits; but, as a man, not the immediate occupational scheme income. He said that this was discriminatory, and went to court. The ECJ agreed. Although statutory schemes run by the Government, in which there was legislation and an element of compulsion, were held to be outside the relevant part of E.U. law, occupational schemes set up by companies were not. The consequence of the ECJ's ruling was the equalisation of retirement ages and pension benefits for men and women.
Which, on the face of it, is fair enough. Pension benefits such as the above are a part of worker compensation, and there is no reason why men and women should receive different compensation, if they do the same job. However, there is a big difference in my view between that position and the new ruling. Because it is demonstrably the case that men (particularly young men) are, on average, involved in more car accidents than women; and it is also demonstrably the case that men, on average, do not live for as long as women. Taking account of those facts gives more accurate pricing of car insurance and annuities for both men and women.
The ECJ has now rejected that argument. What this ultimately means, I feel, is that the easy parts of "equality" legislation have already been introduced, and that future changes will inevitably be more controversial. Equality, it turns out, is a slippery concept.
Walter Blotscher
Every now and then courts deliver a bombshell, that affects all of our lives. This week the European Court of Justice did just that.
The ECJ held that insurers cannot by law charge different rates for men and women, since this is discriminatory under E.U. law. This ruling, which takes effect from 21 December 2012 so that the insurance industry has time to adapt its pricing models, will have at least two wide effects. The first is that car insurance premiums, which are generally higher for men than for women, will equalise, either reducing for men and/or rising for women. The second is that annuities, a sort of pension, where, in return for a fixed sum of money, the pensioner receives a guaranteed income for the rest of his/her life, will also equalise, in general through giving men a lower annual income (since men live shorter lives, a lump-sum payment of £xx,000 currently gives them a greater annual income than women in the same position). These changes will affect milions of people across the whole of Europe.
This is not the first time that the ECJ has dropped a bombshell like this. Its 1990 ruling, in the famous case of Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange, had similarly dramatic effects on occupational pension schemes. GRE ran a typical scheme, in which men retired at 62 and women at 57. On redundancy, scheme members could obtain an immediate pension income at 55 for men, and 50 for women. Mr. Barber was made redundant at the age of 52, and obtained normal statutory benefits; but, as a man, not the immediate occupational scheme income. He said that this was discriminatory, and went to court. The ECJ agreed. Although statutory schemes run by the Government, in which there was legislation and an element of compulsion, were held to be outside the relevant part of E.U. law, occupational schemes set up by companies were not. The consequence of the ECJ's ruling was the equalisation of retirement ages and pension benefits for men and women.
Which, on the face of it, is fair enough. Pension benefits such as the above are a part of worker compensation, and there is no reason why men and women should receive different compensation, if they do the same job. However, there is a big difference in my view between that position and the new ruling. Because it is demonstrably the case that men (particularly young men) are, on average, involved in more car accidents than women; and it is also demonstrably the case that men, on average, do not live for as long as women. Taking account of those facts gives more accurate pricing of car insurance and annuities for both men and women.
The ECJ has now rejected that argument. What this ultimately means, I feel, is that the easy parts of "equality" legislation have already been introduced, and that future changes will inevitably be more controversial. Equality, it turns out, is a slippery concept.
Walter Blotscher
Wednesday 2 March 2011
FRENCH DIPLOMACY IN AFRICA
North Africa is pretty much France's backyard. Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria are all former French colonies, as are states to the south such as Niger and Chad. France has also had a long-standing relationship with Egypt, dating back to Napoleonic times. Only Libya is outside of its natural sphere of influence.
Why then has it made such a mess of things lately? A mess that finally resulted in the resignation of France's Foreign Minister Michelle Alliot-Marie on Sunday night. The answer lies in the way that France does diplomacy in Africa. First, find a local strongman, that is reliably pro-French. Secondly, back the strongman to the hilt, with armed force if necessary, particularly when he first seizes power. Thirdly, manage the relationship on a personal basis, strongman to Elysee Palace, bypassing normal diplomatic channels. And lastly, ignore said strongman's rigged elections, venal corruption and acquisition of foreign assets (often chateaux in France), if the quid pro quo is French influence in the country and contracts for French firms.
That strategy sits ill with the current demands across the region for democracy and freedom, particularly freedom from the domestic oppressions of the various strongmen. In the first days of the Tunisian uprising that sparked off the whole wave of protests, Ms. Alliot-Marie was holidaying in the country. It turns out that she took free trips in the private jet of a local business tycoon with extremely close links to the (now deposed) President. When she returned to France, she then offered the services of the French secret service to the Tunisian police force, who were in the process of killing demonstrators. It's hard to think of a more gaffe-prone performance.
Ms. Alliot-Marie has been replaced by Alain Juppe, who did the job before from 1993 to 1995, and was Prime Minister under Jacques Chirac from 1995 to 1997. This is a major rehabilitation for Mr. Juppe, who was convicted in 2004 of abuse of public funds, following the use by his political party of employees of the city of Paris, long run by Mr. Chirac, and given a suspended prison sentence. However, Ministers with scandal attached to them are also common in France. It remains to be seen whether that policy is as ill-advised in the long run as the way that France has managed its clients in Africa.
Walter Blotscher
North Africa is pretty much France's backyard. Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria are all former French colonies, as are states to the south such as Niger and Chad. France has also had a long-standing relationship with Egypt, dating back to Napoleonic times. Only Libya is outside of its natural sphere of influence.
Why then has it made such a mess of things lately? A mess that finally resulted in the resignation of France's Foreign Minister Michelle Alliot-Marie on Sunday night. The answer lies in the way that France does diplomacy in Africa. First, find a local strongman, that is reliably pro-French. Secondly, back the strongman to the hilt, with armed force if necessary, particularly when he first seizes power. Thirdly, manage the relationship on a personal basis, strongman to Elysee Palace, bypassing normal diplomatic channels. And lastly, ignore said strongman's rigged elections, venal corruption and acquisition of foreign assets (often chateaux in France), if the quid pro quo is French influence in the country and contracts for French firms.
That strategy sits ill with the current demands across the region for democracy and freedom, particularly freedom from the domestic oppressions of the various strongmen. In the first days of the Tunisian uprising that sparked off the whole wave of protests, Ms. Alliot-Marie was holidaying in the country. It turns out that she took free trips in the private jet of a local business tycoon with extremely close links to the (now deposed) President. When she returned to France, she then offered the services of the French secret service to the Tunisian police force, who were in the process of killing demonstrators. It's hard to think of a more gaffe-prone performance.
Ms. Alliot-Marie has been replaced by Alain Juppe, who did the job before from 1993 to 1995, and was Prime Minister under Jacques Chirac from 1995 to 1997. This is a major rehabilitation for Mr. Juppe, who was convicted in 2004 of abuse of public funds, following the use by his political party of employees of the city of Paris, long run by Mr. Chirac, and given a suspended prison sentence. However, Ministers with scandal attached to them are also common in France. It remains to be seen whether that policy is as ill-advised in the long run as the way that France has managed its clients in Africa.
Walter Blotscher
Tuesday 1 March 2011
KARL-THEODOR zu GUTTENBERG (2)
I predicted last week that Germany's Defence Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg would eventually bow to pressure and resign before the summer holidays, after he had been stripped of his law doctorate for plagiarism.
I was wrong in the timing, since he has just resigned. The tipping point appears to have been the fact that yesterday, more than 20,000 academics wrote to Chancellor Angela Merkel, complaining that he was still in his job.
It is possible that Herr zu Guttenberg could return to politics. However, he may - understandably - not want to. And even if he does, it won't be for some time.
Walter Blotscher
I predicted last week that Germany's Defence Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg would eventually bow to pressure and resign before the summer holidays, after he had been stripped of his law doctorate for plagiarism.
I was wrong in the timing, since he has just resigned. The tipping point appears to have been the fact that yesterday, more than 20,000 academics wrote to Chancellor Angela Merkel, complaining that he was still in his job.
It is possible that Herr zu Guttenberg could return to politics. However, he may - understandably - not want to. And even if he does, it won't be for some time.
Walter Blotscher
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
