Saving the workers - bees.

In seeking to understand the decision to ban the use of neonicotinoid pesticides within the European Union, it is instructive to consider the arguments for and against. The pressure to make this decision has been gradually mounting over the last few months as fears for the dwindling bee population have been growing.

Although there is no solid evidence for the detrimental effect of these pesticides on the bee population, the circumstantial evidence is compelling. Those who oppose this ban point to the ever increasing consumer demand for a higher output of cleaner produce. At a time when our country continues to throw away as much food as it consumes, it is difficult to endorse this argument. Surely the solution should be to restrict the amount of food which can be thrown away. Perhaps a new approach is needed. For too long, our thinking seems to have been underpinned by the concept that if you can afford it, you can purchase as much food as you like. Putting aside the vulgar amount of waste which is thus generated, it is surely the time to start to consider not ourselves, but the land which supports us. It seems logical and entirely reasonable to me that we should be seeking to support the land to the same degree as it supports us.

The bees have of course been here far longer than we have and have thus far proved a resilient and productive species. Aside from their production of honey which we like so much, it is their capacity to pollinate huge areas of crops which makes them so valuable. As the saying goes, when they are gone, they are gone. Ergo, why not seek to protect a species which is so integral to our future needs? The areas covered by bees are truly astonishing which renders the concept of organic honey one of the biggest marketing cons of all time. It is also worth noting that we have been growing crops for thousands of years before the need for pesticides was first espoused. Clearly, pharmaceutical companies have a huge vested interest in promoting such products. It is the prerogative of the rest of us to oppose them. For what must be a singularly unique occasion, I therefore congratulate the European Union on one of the most sensible policies ever proposed. Would it be too much to expect more of the same?

It was interesting though to note that of the countries who opposed the ban, ours led the pack. The pesticide contains a derivative chemical of nicotine which is well documented to harm us with respect to our nervous system. In common with many other countries, we have seen fit to ban cigarettes in public places. Could we not apply the same principle to farming and seek to save the bee population from a drug which has contributed to so many deaths in our own population? Doubtless the bees would be telling our government to buzz off on this one! 

Facing the realities of human nature

The announcement today that Iain Duncan Smith would like the rich elderly to give back their benefit payments which they don't need is more than a little naive. I can well understand how frustrated he must feel in seeking to control the heavy burden of the welfare state. For all that though, he must remain realistic. In this, his latest announcement, he is laying himself at the mercy of altruism. This is hopeful at best and, at worst, out of touch.

If people are given a benefit, they grow to depend upon it and don't take kindly to it being taken away. The problem with welfare legislation is that it is far easier to give than to take away. It is this very point which defines the real problem facing this and the next government. There is a very large elephant in the room of which all the politicians are painfully well aware. Pensions. The public sector pensions bill is a growing monster which will not go away. It will just get bigger. People live longer and so the pension has to be paid out for longer. It is simple economics. The problem is that addressing this imbalance will go down like a lead balloon with the millions of voters employed in the public sector. Face it though we must. Failure to do so will result in a spiraling national debt. We need only look eastwards to Greece and Cyprus to see what happens next. It may be that we ultimately end up being restricted to how much we are allowed to withdraw from the bank as has happened recently in Cyprus. While in one sense this wouldn't necessarily be such a bad thing, there is equally no need for us to end up that way.

We saw recently with reflections on the Thatcher years that people invariably respond unfavourably when decisions are made which upset their status quo. That is human nature because we none of us like change and particularly when it is of the financially detrimental variety. What does the minister mean when he refers to the rich? Does he mean those whose disposable income is greater than their outgoings? Where he draws the line is largely irrelevant. Any welfare system has to be fair to all irrespective of accumulated wealth. What is clear though is that there has to be defined level of income upon which people can reasonably be expected to exist. Deeper than this though is the reality that the welfare system which was originally intended to sustain those without a job, and hence food and a roof over their head, has been allowed to grow out of all proportion to its founding principles.

We have gradually become accustomed to local government and the welfare state operating in such a way as to try to do everything for us. Neither was ever intended to fulfill this purpose. One of our biggest societal problems today is an expectation to look to government to provide the solutions. No government will ever be able to do this for us all due to simple economics. It is when people get together to effect change collectively that the change is real and lasting. I read with interest today about the quiet mid-Wales town of Machynlleth. It is admittedly a bit of a mouthful to pronounce but the people there are engaging in something quite interesting.

When a town is as geographically isolated as Machynlleth, it is inevitably up to the local people to sustain the vibrancy of the local economy. The retail behemoth Tesco has just announced that it will not be opening a new shop there because they couldn't get their own way on a new road system which would revolve around them. At a subsequent public meeting, a local shop owner vented his anger which resulted in the formation of a town forum of 100 people. Their forum begins its work with the planned restoration of a local garden which they hope to complete before their annual comedy festival. Plans have now been made to restore a fountain and several other local attractions. All this is being achieved by local people with no local council involvement - and nor should there be. It must be remembered that the majority of local council employees have limited experience of running a business and so are of limited value in seeking to help those in business locally.

When it comes to radical improvisation, Machynlleth has a healthy track record, most notably with the formation in 1973 of the first centre for alternative technology. In those days, the people involved in setting up their eco community in a disused quarry were labelled as hippies. It is today apparent that their motives were several decades ahead of the rest of us. Today, Wales is festooned with wind farms and it is difficult to drive through any suburban housing area without seeing banks of solar panels on roofs. What those pioneers achieved all those years ago was to show us all what could be done in a more environmentally sensitive way. What was fundamental to their achievements was the fact that they worked together as a group and were unrestricted by edicts from local government or the welfare state. They created a community totally divorced from the national grid and eyed with wary suspicion by the inhabitants of the local town. The hundreds of thousands of visitors who have since gone to see the results of their collaboration are testament to what can be achieved when people join forces to make things happen. Free of the shackles of the state, there are few limits to the good we can do. It is from such small ideas that community spirit is born. Tesco and its ilk can't hold a torch to that. 
 

Working for the yankee dollar

In attempting to understand the current vogue for defending the indefensible, we need to look stateside. Today, the manager of Liverpool football club offered his reaction to the news that Luis Suarez, his star striker, has been banned for ten matches. Put simply, the imposed ban is a consequence of the said player biting an opponent during a recent match. Last year, he received a lengthy ban for racially abusing another opponent. Brendan Rodgers, the Liverpool manager, claimed that the ten match ban was too harsh. Each to their own, but the player did actually bite someone else in front of 40,000 fans. The truth of course revolves around money-American money at that. Liverpool's American owner wants a return on his investment and why wouldn't he? He hasn't paid a huge sum for the club to see his top goal scorer banned for ten matches. This is why Brendan Rodgers today attempted, with a reasonably straight face, to effectively defend the actions of his player by questioning the length of the ban imposed upon him. Even football has to have some sort of moral baseline and if biting an opponent doesn't cross that line, then I'm not sure what does.

On the Today programme this morning, an interesting discussion took place. James Naughtie was interviewing the Labour Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, Margaret Hodge, and a senior accountant from Deloitte. As the discussion turned its attention to the tax affairs of Starbucks, the senior accountant, whose company represents them, claimed that Starbucks don't pay much tax because they don't make much profit. If you fancy a bit of pure comedy, you can listen again on the BBC i player. Clearly, the man from Deloitte has a vested interest but even his most ardent fan couldn't possibly take such a claim seriously. Granted, the public have become justifiably annoyed at the revelations that a clutch of prominent American-owned companies are trading rather well over here at our expense. They are undoubtedly playing within the tax law to the letter of the law. In reality though, they are in contempt of our tax laws. The trouble is that there is no way of enforcing their moral compliance because the very people who advise Starbucks et al also happen to advise HM revenue and customs. Either way, the accountants win and the yankee dollar makes hay while the English pound languishes in the doldrums. At a time when we are all being asked to play our part in reducing the deficit, it seems absurd that huge multi-national companies can effectively pick and choose how much tax they wish to pay. The Starbucks board actually offered to pay£20 million earlier this year when they became aware of the extent of the public outrage. I suspect that the offer was actually made when they saw the effect on their till receipts..

There is little evidence of the Yankee dollar on the streets of the town where I live. Like many traditional market towns, Denbigh faces a slow death as its town centre is slowly squeezed by the large supermarkets. Slowly but surely the shops become vacant and the shoppers more scarce. Of course it is a cycle with a seemingly inevitable conclusion. It doesn't have to be that way though. At a dinner party last night, a guest pointed out four buildings whose current state of affairs makes him feel very angry. Many in the town would agree with him but few seem forthcoming with a solution. The former North Wales Hospital which once the envy of the UK mental health community slowly crumbles. Neglected and vandalised, it is now a mere shadow of its former self with its past glories but a distant memory for the many locals employed there. The old cinema is also derelict and it seems strange now to recall the building where queues would extend long distances when I was younger. The Church Institute is privately owned but only used as storage for a local antique dealer. First opened during the Greta War, it was built so that returning soldiers would have a place to go and recuperate. It is a stunning building and is thankfully intact structurally. Inside it is cavernous and it is easy to imagine the injured young servicemen coming there to meet up and recuperate.  Finally, the Crown Hotel was a former Coaching Inn on the busy route towards the west coast and Ireland.

What these four buildings have in common is something very fundamental. They were all social hubs where people came to meet up with friends and work colleagues. The biggest worry is that they haven't been replaced. This is a poor reflection on the local community. It was the local community which first built these places and, if they are to have their day again, it must be the local community who make it happen. People coming together over a meal or a drink goes right back to the dawn of time. While the internet has certainly exerted a dramatic impact on our lives, we must avoid falling in to the trap of insularity. Our relationships with those in our local community are the very fabric of our society. When we lose the fabric, we lose our social cohesion. I hope for Denbigh and all the towns like it that our generation comes together to regain the community spirit which was lost to the all conquering supermarkets. Such a change will not be realised by local councils. Such a change will be effected by local people. There seems a popularly held view that nothing can happen without the involvement of the local council. The opposite could hardly be more true and it will be a breath of fresh air to see it happen. If we really care about where we live, we will become more engaged. If not, I fear the current trend will continue and that would be very sad outcome.    

Hospitals, Hotels and Health

The front page of yesterday's Daily Telegraph featured a young female medical student who had tragically died as a result of taking a banned weight loss drug. DNP (2,4-Dinitrophenol) is used to make herbicides and has also been employed as a wood preservative. The student in question was known to suffer from Bulimia nervosa. Like me, the student in question was a fourth year medical student so I vouch that she must have been a highly committed and intelligent person. No rational person would order a drug off the internet whose use is currently warned against by the food standards agency. But that is the point. With long standing Bulimia, this poor girl would have been consumed with controlling the effects of her regular hunger. As sad as this death is, I wonder if we need to re-address the way in which weight is portrayed in our media. Of course, our media has changed so much in such a short space of time with the internet now the at the forefront. I feel desperately sad for her family and support their call for such drugs to be formally banned. The problem though is that banning something often has the opposite effect. Indeed, the internet seems to able to sell us anything with little real accountability to anyone. Freedom of choice is great but regulation also has its place. It is a tricky balance but one which the policy makers need to address as a matter of urgency.

It is difficult to read anything today without stumbling upon yet another debate about how to solve the problems which currently face the NHS. In all honesty, the NHS has now become so large and so over-subscribed, it is becoming more and more difficult to know where to start. The Prime Minister announced today a plan to open "Hospital Hotels" for nearly 30,000 patients in an attempt to address the current national crisis of "bed blocking". This seeks to replicate a system already well established in Sweden. Surprise, surprise. The plan is not without opposition though. In each "hotel", a threadbare staff of three nurses will be on hand to deal with elderly patients. An emergency requires a doctor to be called and the main caring of the patients is expected to be undertaken by their relatives. Of greatest concern, patients without relatives will be expected to treat themselves under a "self service" system overseen by non-medical staff. It is claimed that many of these patients will have dementia or a known history of falls. It must be stressed though that should the patients require urgent treatment, they will be immediately transferred back to the main hospital.

As our society gets older, care of the elderly is going to become an increasingly divisive issue. Of that there is no doubt. Put simply, the longer we keep people alive, the more things go wrong with them. This is simply the ageing process. Between, stroke, heart disease, cancer, dementia, Parkinson's disease and the million and one other morbidities, illness is sadly an inevitability of old age. That said, we still need to at least be humane in the way we address it.

I live in Denbigh and growing up was often at pains to explain that I was born in the hospital at the bottom of the hill as opposed to one at the top. The one at the top closed its doors for the last time in 1995 and, at its peak, housed in excess of 1700 patients. The "Denbigh Mental" as it was known locally, was originally opened as a Lunatic Asylum in 1848. By the time of its peak in the 1960s, it had become a major reservoir for elderly care with many patients suffering from dementia. While the elderly were cared for there, the local hospital at Bodelwyddan was presumably freed up to concentrate on non-elderly care. I have written extensively elsewhere about the old Denbigh Hospital but would like to say that while it represented an old model of healthcare, something similar might not be too far removed from what we need today. It had extensive gardens and no shortage of wide open spaces set in beautiful countryside. The ration of staff to patients was also a lot better then with 1700 patients and about 1000 staff! Just imagine that today. From the many people I have spoken to who used to work there, it is clear that the Denbigh Hospital was far more than a hospital - it was a community to which the staff and patients alike felt a real sense of belonging. I don't see that as being a bad thing because I see so little evidence of it today - and more is the pity.

The fact is that we will never again see staff ratios like that due to market forces and increasing longevity. We therefore need to adapt and seek new ways. I'm not sure all of the proposals being made today would bear scrutiny, but do have sympathy for some of them. When I was really ill in 2005, my stay in hospital was enhanced beyond all measure by the support of my family when I was in hospital. Far from minding, the hospital welcomed the fact that people were prepared to come in and keep the room clean and attend to my basic needs. I appreciate that not everybody will be as lucky as I was with regard to family but do feel it is an area worthy of consideration. The one problem I have with it is the question of money. I have written many times before about the scandalous way in which successive governments have failed to recognise the worth of the army of carers who already relieve the NHS so admirably. I say it again here. By all means encourage family members to care for their loved ones but for heavens sake pay them something. It may not even be at the level of the minimum wage, but it at least needs to cover their basic expenses.

To expect a patient recovering from a stroke to care for themselves is patent nonsense and although cost cutting is at the forefront of political thought, common sense must also be accomodated. The current litigations outstanding against the NHS continue to rise exponentially with an estimated £1.2 billion being paid out last year alone. Granted, better standards of care within the hospitals will hopefully reduce these figures but perhaps the time has come to just accept that the staff can no longer cope with the sheer numbers confronting them on a daily basis. There are tough decisions to be made and, as with all such decisions, they will not be universally accepted in the first instance.

When it was operational, the Denbigh Hospital didn't have vending machines with sweets, crisps and chocolate. In what would be deemed rather quaint in the modern NHS, it had a working farm from which it took its meat, milk and vegetables. I would argue that rather than being quaint, such a model would be highly progressive today and would send out all the right messages in terms of diet. If the only choice of food was a square meal, I assume that is what people would eat.

Cuts do have to be made and polls suggest that most people understand why. Most people. The announcement yesterday that government borrowing had fallen by a fraction was met with derision by the Labour Party. If anyone wanted to know the intentions of Labour if re-elected, we were given a much clearer vision yesterday. They responded to the borrowing figures by saying that at this rate it would take over four hundred years to get rid of government borrowing. Apart from it being a political statement of schoolboy proportion, it showed clearly that Labour would do what they have historically always done. Spend. Spend. Spend. The shadow chancellor is under the illusion that all we have to do restore growth is to borrow more money (which we don't actually have and probably won't even get) to build more houses (when people can't even afford the ones already out there) and create more jobs (with about as much long term security as a Mars bar in Dawn French's house). We had an ostrich chancellor from 1997 until 2007 and I'm not sure if anyone I speak to is feeling strong enough to risk another just yet. They say that a politician usually says precisely what he doesn't mean and Mr. Brown's watchword of prudence was a case in point.

News last week that up to half of children would gladly cheat to garner an advantage on the sportsfield came as little surprise to me. Ever since Jimmy Hill fought for Johnny Haynes to receive £100 per week, the maximum wage for a football player became a thing of the past. Seeing Luis Suarez bite an opponent at the week-end was just the latest low point of a sport whose morality seems to know no depths. Until our children once more get to see true amateur sport being played the proper way, I fear this trend is likely to continue. Children are great at so many skills and not least for copying. We can hardly be surprised. I shudder to think what the sportsmen of the amateur era must think when they see the way sport is played today. I would imagine they would have the foresight to turn off the television. It is only the switching on of the television which will feed this descent in on-field behaviour.         

How far would you go?

When, at the age of 39, I turned up for my first day at Medical School, I was consciously aware of the type of students who I would now encounter. Inevitably, they would mainly be big fish from small ponds having arrived fresh from top grade A level results. The concept of failure would be alien to them and their experience of life as I now understand it would be rather more limited. I expected them to be competitive with a desire to be the best.

What I encountered when I met these people was a great surprise to me. In the main, they did arrive fresh from shining A level results. While I had expected them to be competitive, I had seriously underestimated the lengths to which they would go to try and establish some form of advantage over their peers. It was part selfish, part ruthless and part focused. The three inevitably become blurred. Of the many aspects of their behaviour which surprised me at the time, one incident in particular still puzzles and disturbs me. During the first few weeks of Medical School, a senior member of the teaching staff addressed the year to report an incident which had surprised even themselves - and heaven knows they would have seen plenty of competitive behaviour over the years. It transpired that one of these students had happened upon a book in the library which they identified as being particularly helpful. To avoid the unthinkable outcome of any other student getting their hands on it, the student in question had hidden the book in a separate part of the library used so seldom that it was unlikely to ever be found. Even after four years, I still can't quite understand the motivation for such behaviour. At best it speaks of insecurity but at worst it is just plain selfish.

The reason I write this today is that these are the doctors of tomorrow. In attempting to think the best of everyone, I like to imagine that the student in question learned their lesson. I am not convinced that they did though. In early August, students like this will embark on their medical careers as junior doctors with responsibility for the patients in their care. It may well be that such a student will become an excellent junior doctor and enjoy a glittering career awash with recognition and plaudits. The other possibility is not quite as appealing. The irony from my perspective is that the students who I encountered at Medical School were evidently intelligent and so had nothing to prove. How wrong I was. Knowledge is very important but the ability to share and work within a team is far more important.

In life, we all like to achieve our best regardless of our job or career. I would like to think though that most of us like to help our colleagues if we can. I would like to inject some balance in to this piece by saying that I also encountered some students who showed huge maturity in spite of having just left school. As parents it is our responsibility to teach our children well. They will grow to be the people we have created and nurtured. Looking out for the other guy is surely one of the most important lessons for all of us. The world we live in becomes more self orientated all the time so it is the duty of all of us to think of our fellow man.

As a mature student studying medicine, my advice to others seeking to do likewise would be to give it serious thoguth. It is not an easy ride and, from my experience, being married with a child affords you no special consideration. I have only ever sought to be treated the same as everyone else but sometimes feel as though I get a raw deal. Next year, I spend fifteen weeks in general practice in Tenbury Wells. All the other general practices are closer to Denbigh than Tenbury Wells so it seems strange that I should be sent there. I will though, seek to make the most out of my time in Worcestershire in spite of the time I will have away from my family. I have learned that even when the odds seem stacked against you, there is always an opportunity lurking. You may rest assured I will find that opportunity and embrace it.

The Pontfadog Oak

Starting exactly 1200 days ago, this blog now arrives at its 100th post. A hundred years ago saw three momentous events take place in the Principality. On 14th October 1913, 439 men perished in the Senghenydd mining disaster. It remains the biggest mining disaster in Wales. It devastated the local community and was followed a fortnight later by a hurricane in various parts of South Wales. With winds in excess of 160mph, four more people were killed. The man who go on to become the first and, thus far, only Welsh prime minister, was David Lloyd George. In 1913, he was the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the then Liberal government. It became clear in 1913 that he had bought shares in Marconi at a favourable price from the then Attorney General Sir Rufus Isaacs. Clearly, corruption in politics is not the new phenomenon we sometimes think it to be. Although he would go on to become the Liberal Prime Minister, his coalition was mainly propped up by Tories and the stain on his character left an indelible mark. The Liberals were never the same force again after the election of 1922. How the tables turn. A century later, we now have a Tory coalition being propped up by the Liberals.

Of course, all these events were happening a year before the Great War in which nine million lives were needlessly lost in the most brutal of all wars. The whole of Europe was in a state of flux leading up to that fateful shot in Sarajevo a year later. Vienna was still the cultural capital of Europe and by sheer coincidence housed six men of great future significance within walking distance of each other. Was this chance of were they just all attracted to the cultural charm of the Danubian gem? Either way, Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Leon Trotsky, Josip Tito, Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung all resided there in 1913 and for all we know took their coffee in the same coffee house. It is truly remarkable to reflect on their collective and respective contributions to our history books. The founder of the Red Army with his own interpretation of Marxism, Trotsky was the true intellect behind the Russian revolution. Ousted from Russia by Stalin in a power struggle in 1929, he was later assassinated in 1941. Arguably, Stalin was one of the most ruthless men to walk this earth. The Gulag Archipelago by Alexander Solzhenitsyn gives a graphic account of life under the Georgian monster. We will never know the exact number who lost their lives during the purges and in the gulags but estimates vary between 3 and 60 million. A Yugoslav nationalist hailing from Northern Croatia, Tito wasted little time in creating Yugoslavia in the aftermath of the Great War. History tells us that not everyone was happy with that decision as evidenced by the further attrocities which took place there in the 1990s. I don't even need to write about the legacy of Hitler because his actions were so evil, they serve as a constant reminder to us all about what happens when the bigots and extremists get their hands on power. While these four revolutionaries were sowing the seeds of their future ideas, Freud and Jung were trying to work out what made us all tick. Nobody has yet worked that one out and perhaps they never will.

The gales which blew here in Denbigh last night might not have reached the 160mph speeds of 1913 but they were still very frightening. I read with great sadness today that the oldest documented tree in Wales had fallen victim to its gusts. The Pontfadog Oak was said to date from the year 802 and measured just shy of 13 metres in diameter. It is claimed that Owain Glyndwr the last Prince of Wales gathered his troops there before going on to defeat Henry IV in battle. He may have won the battle, but he lost the war and by 1412 he disappeared never heard of or seen again. The Welsh continue to seek autonomy within the Union and would do well to pause and reflect on their history. Economically, Wales is more reliant on Westminster than ever before and although it has been granted certain powers of self government, can scarcely hope to exist independently until it re-balances its top-heavy public sector with a more aspirational private sector. Whether or not this is realistic is doubtful. The coal mines of 1913 are now gone along with the steam ships and steam railways which depended on them so it is time to seek industries new or the future will, like the slate, be grey.

The Pontfadog Oak saw lots of change during its 1111 years and I reflected on how different life must have been when that acorn first took root in the ground near Chirk. In the end, it wasn't man who brought about its demise. 1913 may well have been a momentous year but in the end, the cruel, late winter of 2013 was truly the straw which broke the camels back. But what a magnificent life it had and what a hatful of stories it could tell - if only it could.  

A milestone for a great institution

This week marks the 150th anniversary since the first edition of Wisden's cricket almanac. For my 99th post on this blog, it seems somehow fitting to pay homage to a small yellow book which is so beloved of cricket devotees such as me.

To get to the riches of the little yellow book though, people normally have to first make a connection with the great game. This happened to me during the long, improbable summer of 1981. Hitherto, I had paid little attention to quirky game where the men dressed in white tried to knock over three stumps with a mystical looking red ball. In 1981, England entertained the Australians and the tour started very badly for our lot. The new captain Ian Botham was still very young at just 24 years of age and had already made a considerable name for himself on the world stage since his baptism against the same opposition four years earlier. He had though just brought his downbeat team back from a torrid tour of the West Indies against the side I still contend to have been one of the two best to grace the game. A great side has no weak link and that West Indian team was as solid as a rock. The established opening pair of Greenidge and Haynes were always good for a century stand to get the innings off to a flyer. The middle order contained the captain Clive Lloyd whose bat looked like a toy in his enormous hands. His ability to take any attack apart was well known. Alvin Kallicharan had been plying his trade with Warwickshire for a few seasons by then and had every shot in the book. Collis King was a legendary smiter of gargantuan sixes which just left the small matter of Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards. Viv didn't walk on to bat. He swaggered. With some justification. I have never seen any man so comprehensively annihilate the opposition bowling. If Kallicharan had every shot in the book, Viv had several more which weren't and never will be.

Derek Murray was the keeper in those days before you arrived at the wall of death - the bowlers. Just writing their names makes me shudder. Holding, Garner, Marshall and Croft. All fast. All deadly. England didn't stand a chance against that lot so were looking forward to the plane trip home. For the record, Michael Holding along with Richard Hadley of New Zealand is the bowler who has given me the greatest pleasure. Very different bowlers but they both knew how to successfully locate the stumps and both possessed bowling actions that you wished you could give to every young player.

England started the Ashes of 1981 1-0 down with four tests to play. Botham was relieved of the captaincy and looked a shadow of the player who had arrived on the scene a few years earlier. The next three tests were the stuff of legend and I was hooked on cricket for life. It was electric. His 149 not out at Headingley was an astonishing innings because while it enjoyed a little luck, it was played without a care in the world. His five wickets for one run off 29 balls wrapped up proceedings at the next test in Birmingham. Then came the innings for the purist. His century at Old Trafford was as good an innings as you could hope to see. Yes there were five sixes but they weren't risky, they weren't slogs - they were just clinical controlled hitting.

After that, my appetite for cricket just grew and grew. Wisden is the go to book for any lover of the game with its mountain of statistics and records. When Alec Waugh first described it as the "bible of cricket", there was little to add.

In 1889, it introduced its "Six cricketers of the year". Among the notables that year were Johnny Briggs from Lancashire and Bobby Peel from Yorkshire. Briggs would soon be declared insane and consigned to a lunatic asylum for the rest of his days. Today, we call it epilepsy but things were different then and the stigma was palpable.

Bobby Peel's story is perhaps a little more amusing. Sacked by the autocratic Yorkshire president a few years later, the reason for his sacking was given as , "watering the pitch in a socially unacceptable manner". Quite. 

Art for arts sake

With bemusement, I today learn that protestors have congregated in London to protest against Lady Thatcher. The police report that arrests of many of those attending are due to alcohol intoxication. This immediately questions why they were there in the first place. If they just wanted to get drunk, they could have just done so within the confines of their own home. Evidently, the weather must have been fair in London today. Maybe I'm missing the point though. Perhaps it is necessary to drink yourself in to oblivion before you can adequately give vent to your artistic spleen. Seriously, for fear of sounding a little censorious, those attending these "protests" are the very louts who so angered the late Prime Minister. Whatever her rights and wrongs, and there were plenty on both sides of the argument, she always promoted those who wanted to do better. Understandably in the eyes of the majority, she would have had short shrift for these ne'er-do-wells.

As people have reacted in the aftermath of her death, one anomaly has been exposed. For an electorate who can't even be bothered to put an X in the box on Election Day, it is heartening to see so many engaging with the political process. Honestly, the reasons for their engagement must be considered secondary to the fact that they are engaging at all. The only way we can effect change and make our views known is to vote on the few occasions we have the chance to. Perhaps if more of those protesting had so in the 1980s, they would now be chastising the legacy of Neil Kinnock instead. But as the saying goes, "you pay your money, and you make your choice".

News that the LSE is disgruntled with the motives of the BBC is highly entertaining. This is the far left being annoyed by the left! The BBC is taking a number of LSE students undercover in to North Korea having first secured their informed consent. I'm going to assume that students who come from the top 1% of the population understand what they are electing to do and seek to find out what really goes on in the land that time forgot. From my perspective, I will be fascinated if a little horrified to see the results of their findings. I watch this space with great interest.

The far left views of the LSE are hardly a new concept having been well established since the early 1960s. Of its famous alumni, Mick Jagger ranks quite high. As he embarks on his eighth decade of life, fame is now well and truly his. Even from the early days of the Stones, he was never exactly shy around cameras. Some would say this is the basic requirement for a frontman but not everyone would agree. Jagger, it must be remembered, came from the middle class of the early 60s as opposed to what we think of as the middle class today. Someone from his background today would take their degree at the LSE before seeking their fortune in the City. Hardly, rock and roll.

The Stones were formed by a man who couldn't have cared less about fame. He was though, an extraordinary musician who sadly left us in 1969 the worse for wear with drink, drugs and the asthma from which he had always suffered badly. Brian Jones would barely have known what to do in middle class social circles coming as he did from a working class suburban family in Gloucester. Thankfully, he sought to break free from the West country. He didn't take long to make his mark on the burgeoning rhythm and blues scene of London in the early 1960s. Brian became bored very easily as was evidenced by the countless musical instruments he mastered during his all too short life. After he had set the standard for slide guitar on tracks like Little Red Rooster, he moved on to marimba on Under My Thumb, recorder on Ruby Tuesday, trumpet on Child of the Moon, Appalachian dulcimer on Lady Jane, oboe on Dandelion, mellotron on She's a rainbow and, just for good measure, autoharp on You got the silver. Not a bad repertoire in any era. But Brian Jones was far more than just his music. He was, to coin a much used expression, a sixties icon. His sense of fashion, his opinions and taste and his utter disregard for convention set him apart from his peers straight away. Above all, Brian was that very rare animal. Brian was an aesthete par excellence. I feel he wouldn't be out of place in the company of Shelley, Wilde and Dante Gabriel Rossetti. It isn't difficult to see why the song-writing team of Jagger and Richards began to seek distance from him. Brian Jones would never have won X-factor but then, he wouldn't have wanted to and nor would he have needed to.

News that the Stones intend to play two dates at Hyde Park following their famous concert there in 1969 smacks of profiteering. Their intention to play Glastonbury strongly suggests a band seeking to cash in while they still can. Perhaps Brian had the right idea getting out when he did. I've read it said that when Brian died, he took the sixties with him. Looking back now, it is hard to contend with that view.   

Hypocrisy, blame and denial

It has been very sad this week to witness the reaction of some to the death of Lady Thatcher. As recently as today, a serving police officer has resigned following comments on Twitter. Social media are here to stay and are generally used responsibly and respectfully by the millions who use them. I wonder if the comments made by the officer were made during work time. He is gone now so it is now academic.  I trust the next holder of his position will be more committed to the job for which he is paid. I can hope.

All of us have reason at various times to feel a little resentful of people we encounter. This is human nature. Thankfully, it is also normal to move on and get on with our lives. It seems that this has been too much for certain sections of society this week. To say that you disagreed with the policies of Lady Thatcher is fine. That is free speech and she of all people would approve. To express joy and happiness that she is dead is a different matter. At best this is childish but at worst it is despicable. How would any of these people feel if their peers expressed similar sentiments about one of their loved ones? In life, we are judged ultimately on our words and our deeds. These people have a lot to reflect on. Whatever we may feel about the past deeds of Lady Thatcher or any one else, it is not right to speak ill of them when they die.

Offhand, I can think of Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussain, Bashar al-Assad, Muammar Gaddafi and many others each of whom have happily presided over the massacre of their own people. The policies of Lady Thatcher in the 1980s may have cost some people their jobs but in the pantheon of world leaders past and present she was hardly a monster! She was an elderly lady who died. I would like to think it is not asking too much to afford her and her family the dignity and respect they deserve as they come to terms with their loss.

News that a song entitled "Ding Dong The Witch is Dead" has become the best selling record in the UK must be welcome news for the producers of the musical "Wizard of Oz". The song is not new of course and first rose to fame when it was performed in 1967 by the Fifth Estate. It is sad that the BBC has taken its usual course of dithering by fudging on the issue of playing it. They propose to play a shortened version. In effect, the BBC had two choices to begin with. The first option was not to play it and thus propel its sales into the stratosphere. If the song contained foul language and was blatantly offensive and distasteful, they would be justified in doing so. The song though is neither offensive nor distasteful. To retain their integrity the BBC must therefore play it in full because it is the top selling single. Ironically, throughout the years of her leadership, I can't remember a single newspaper or journalist portraying her as a witch. Even if people have chosen to associate this song with her in the week that she died, that is surely a matter for them and their consciences. While it is distasteful, by the same token the people who buy this record with Lady Thatcher in mind must live by their deeds. It would be interesting to know how many of the people buying this record actually lived through the 1980s. Would it be beyond the realms of possibility to think that some of them have been influenced by social media? If so, more fool them. If people are bitter about the legacy of Thatcherism, there are more seemly ways to show it.

On a happier theme, our tortoise Hogbad has today emerged from hibernation. It is a reflection of how cold this winter has been that this is the latest anyone can remember her coming out of hibernation. She was tucking happily into a generous wedge of cucumber for supper and looked ready for the summer ahead. I am ready for the summer ahead and as much as I like rain, I do hope that it is the exception rather than the rule this summer.

In his peerless novel Brideshead Revisited, Evelyn Waugh paints a picture of a British summer for which we all crave. In the chapter Et In Arcadia Ego, Waugh takes us on a magical journey which takes us back to the rose tinted days of our youth. Great writers make you feel as though you are actually there. I don't know that I have ever left that place. Evelyn Waugh was undeniably the greatest Catholic writer of the twentieth century and I would happily settle for a summer like that one. Sadly, the wine, women and song of Waugh's world have given way to the sex and drugs and rock and roll of ours. Oh to turn back the clock!

Castro and the 100,000 bicylces: Visionary or delusional?

Amid the endless comment following the death of Margaret Thatcher, it was widely claimed that she played a significant role in the eventual demise of communism. Of course, such a claim can't yet be made as long as the rather curious state of North Korea continues in its current bizarre format. That said, she did indeed play her part along with Reagan in bringing down the Berlin Wall much to the surprise of many in my generation.

This event was to have unforeseen consequences for an island in the Caribbean. Since Fidel Castro's coup, Cuba had famously remained a communist state but had long since lost the support of the former Soviet Union. Life was to become very challenging for the people of Cuba until about 2005 when the process of capitalism slowly began to creep in.

One of the consequences of this period in Cuban history may be crucial as a pointer for our dear old NHS. Put simply, times in Cuba were so hard that food quickly became a luxury. Over eating was not a choice because there was rarely enough. Meat became a luxury and the Cuban diet, like it's mediterranean cousin, becmae rich in fresh fruit, vegetables and fish. This resulted in a fall in waist sizes, heart disease, strokes and diabetes. The link between obesity and cardiovascular disease has of course been documented to death. The stark reality of what happens to the strain on healthcare systems has only emerged recently and the results are truly amazing. Cars became too expensive to run so the government was forced to invest in 100,000 bikes so that people could travel from A to B. An average loss of 5Kg per head over a five year period halved the death rate due to diabetes and reduced death due to cardiovascular disease by a third. The average Cuban between 1990 and 1995 expended more calories than they were able to consume. Thus we are provided with a really valuable example of how the global obesity epidemic can be addressed.

It is seldom that straightforward though. Even though the Cuban example shows us clearly the way to do it, there is one big snag. The Cubans did not have the choice to eat any more because there wasn't any more to eat. Unfortunately, the Western way of life means that we are often guilty of throwing away more food energy than what we expend through exercise - never mind what we actually eat.The key of course is choice. Choice is a wonderful thing in many ways but when is enough enough?

While still Leader of the Opposition, David Cameron was asked what he felt people should do regarding the growing wave of violence and swearing being shown on prime time television. His answer was excellent. He suggested that everyone could regulate what they were watching by simply pressing the "off" button on the remote control. The trouble is that not everyone is willing to press that button. In the same way, not everyone is willing to eat less and exercise more. I fear that the status quo will remain until such time as choice is once more removed as was the case for our grandparents in the 1940s. Of the seven deadly sins, at least three are on display here. Greed, sloth and gluttony all play their part in promoting obesity and its associated health risks. Only this week, Lord Coe presented a startling statistic; half of children in the UK between the ages of 8 and 14 reduce their levels of exercise by half. It has also this been revealed that the average UK child now consumes the equivalent of a bath full of sugary, fizzy drinks every year. Compare that with Castro's Cuba and be very worried about your (our) NHS.

It is well known that the health systems with the greatest focus on Primary Care deliver the best health outcomes (greater life expectancy, earlier detection of cancer and less deaths from cardiovascular disease). This leads to fewer hospital admissions, lower cost and less health inequality. In recent years, the Department of Health has been spending less on Primary Care. Given that the research assures us of improved outcomes when Primary Care becomes the main point of focus, this is counter-intuitive. To put this in to context, 11% of the NHS budget was being spent on Primary Care just 10 years ago. The current 8% level represents a £3.8 billion annual deficit. To try and put that in to context, the cost of the HS2 project (which will inevitably make access to London more viable for more people) is estimated to be £55.7 billion. In the end, it all comes down to priorities.

Under Castro, Cuba boasted (and continues to boast) a free health service which remains the envy of many countries. Priorities. Castro had the insight to recognise that his country could only prosper if decent healthcare was available to everyone. So while the citizens of Cuba may have been considered "backward" by the standards of the"developed" world, they were really trailblazing in what they achieved just by getting their priorities right. Much is now written about equity and fairness. Castro converted the talk in to deeds. Granted, he achieved it with a dictatorial approach, but his legacy stands up to scrutiny.

Abram Maslow was the famous psychologist who espoused a hierarchy of human needs. At the bottom of his pyramid are the basic physiological needs of food, water, fresh air, warmth and rest. As the pyramid goes up, it recognises the need for safety, love and esteem before people are properly equipped to be able to reach their true potential. It is as valid today as when he first proposed it in 1943. Given its obvious logic, it really is hard to understand why a succession of governments in the UK have failed to take note. Castro on the other hand might have been the first example of a Maslowian disciple. For him, a project like HS2 would miss the point. How true?

So while the all powerful right wing media will remind us of what a cruel tyrant Castro was, his true legacy reveals a very different picture which points the way forward for the "developed world".     

Fat Bergs

Occasionally, a news item comes to the fore which demands my attention. Yesterday came a case in point. Before news broke of Lady Thatcher's death, a small news item appeared on the Today programme. Seemingly, a company in Essex has built a processing plant with the aim of burning off fat. My initial thought was that this new processing plant was an allegory for what our bodies are naturally geared to do.

But where was this fat going to come from? Apparently, the sewer system beneath London becomes periodically clogged up with large lumps of fat - fat bergs. People dispose of all sorts of unmentionables down their drains and it all comes together to ultimately block the drainage system. The parallels with our arteries are compelling. The news presenter said what a pity it was that the man from the sewer network hadn't managed to bring a piece with him so that they could see what it looked like. The man replied in a very matter-of-fact sort of way that they wouldn't have liked that because "it would have caused a heck of a stink". The other presenter sought to rescue his colleague by suggesting that other items from our sewage system must inevitably adhere to the fat bergs. Quite.

In an age where we must seek to do what we can to make the most of what we have, I thought this an inspired idea. As they say, where there's muck, there's brass...

Legacy

In a recent post, I paid tribute to the life and achievemnts of the late Dr. Martin Luther King. It was my assertion that he achieved greatness as opposed to being born great or having greatness thrust upon him. The death today of Lady Thatcher has caused more opinion in a very short time frame than anyone in recent memory. I don't think she ticked any of the three boxes. She was born as the very ordinary daughter of a grocer. She definitely didn't have greatness thrust upon her because she spent the majority of her adult life punching above her weight in the hitherto male dominated world of politics. Whether or nor she achieved greatness is open to conjecture and her legacy polarises opinion even now, over twenty years after her quiet exit from British political life.

Whenever we begin the process of assessing the achievements of a politician, footballer, singer or anyone else who has occupied centre stage, we can only do so by considering their achievements within the context of the times in which they shone. When she entered the Tory Shadow cabinet in the 1960s, it was a considerable achievement for a woman. Her promotion to the cabinet of Heath's government in 1970 reflected her rising stature within the party. Heath's government was doomed from day 1 with the least enviable job in British Political history (notwithstanding the job facing the current coalition of course). He arrived at Downing Street with the public finances in a mess following six years of Harold Wilson's boom-time spending. To add to his woes, the country was, in effect, being run not by politicians, but by Union leaders who were not exactly averse to calling their workers out on strike. To try and get a flavour of what life in Britain was like at this time, I can heartily recommend a film entitled, "I'm alright Jack" starring Peter Sellers. Putting the irony and humour to one side, it paints an all too real picture of the extent to which the Unions had begun to dominate and dictate British life. Following Heath's departure from Downing street, Thatcher successfully launched her challenge for the leadership which she was to retain for the next fifteen years and it will be a long time before that happens again.

Few were surprised when Heaths government collapsed in 1974 with the only real surprise being that it had managed to lurch on for so long. Meanwhile Labour resumed power being the puppets of their Union paymasters. The deteriorating national industries went from one strike to another with no politician seeming either disposed or able to intervene. It culminated with people being unable to bury their dead and mountains of rubbish left uncollected in the streets. It would be wrong to report it otherwise because that is how it really was. Following the winter of discontent, the Tories were returned as the only viable alternative. Thatcher had no choice really. Indeed, the parallels with today are compelling. She knew that the only way to get the country out of its mess would entail upsetting millions of people. She aslo knew that it would take a few years before the fruits of her changes would become apparent. She got lucky. The Falklands campaign could not have come at a better time. Up to that point, her popularity was more of a threat than a promise. British history shows though that we all seem to thrive on a good war and moreso when we win it. Jingoism once morew comes to the fore and all is well in the garden. Following her e-election in 1983, her biggest achievement by far was her successful battle with the unions. The unions had stripped bare the once proud British car manufacturing industry, the Steel industry and the Coal miners alone remained with any discernable power. Had she not won that fight, I would question what her legacy would be now. The time had come to promote free enterprise and show the unions that they no longer ran the country. Her success in this should never be underestimated. As I write, Unison, the largest public sector union in the country is desperately seeking the legal right to stage a one day national strike. But for the achievements of Lady Thatcher, they would need no such permission. If we think times are hard now, the unions would soon make it even moreso if they could.

I don't particularly agree with everything she did but she did see off the unions. Stabbed in the back she may have been but politics has always been like that and sadly always will be. Without Thatcher, there would have been no Tony Blair or New Labour because she was the role model to whcih he aspired. The biggest irony of all is that when Labour were eventually returned to power after their seventeen years in the political wilderness, it was with a Thatcher protegee in charge. The big difference between Blair and Thatcher though was their attitude to the balance book. She was Tory to the core and was intent on building up a national surplus. He, by contrast, was really Old Labour with an inclination to spend money rather than save it.

You can't please all of the people all of the time and in this respect Lady Thatcher was no different to anyone else. What she did do though was to expose the polarity of political opinion in this country more than anybody before or since. If you liked her, that was a bonus. If you didn't, she was going to carry out her plan regardless. Her legacy and achievements are undeniable and I am not a Tory voter. An era has passed today because like her or loathe her, she was the last of the conviction politicians. She wouldn't have fudged in the way the current crop do. She stuck to her guns but she actually had a clear vision in the first place. People fear change and so she alienated millions. 

Ready, steady, go!

My post of yesterday has proved rather prophetic. Today, the debate on welfare reform officially started. Both Labour and the Tories were prominent in their pronouncements and quite surprising they were too. Up to a point Lord Copper! Predictably, the Chancellor gave a robust defence of the new changes. He correctly concurred with my view that while those opposed to his reforms were quick to express their disapproval, they failed to offer any alternative approaches. He also made the bold claim that most of the country is behind his reforms and, more pertinently, the reasons for their imposition. His chief reservation with the old system was the amount of money being spent on welfare and, in many ways, the way in which it had been mis-spent.

Following the customary tirade of bluster from Ed Balls earlier in the week, it fell to Harriet Harman to finally offer concrete proposals from the Labour party. She accused the incumbent government of letting people off the hook through the lack of a proper work programme. It emerges that Labour propose a system where benefit payments would depend on past contributions. Unless I've missed something, this places Labour considerably to the right of the Tories. Doubtless, Mr. Blair will be grinning from ear to ear. She went on to divulge that their approach to welfare would be underpinned by three core principles: Work must pay, People should be obliged to take work if offered and the government should support people through a contribution-based system which takes account of what people put in to the system and what they take out. In fairness, she could scarcely be more clear. Well, it was her party who ushered in the minimum wage in response to claims of unfair rates of pay. As the system stands, people are already obliged to take work if it is offered. But it is the final point which will ruffle feathers in Westminster because this constitutes Labour advocating conditional welfare payments. I fancy we have yet to hear the last of this one and the Tories must think Christmas has come early this year. On this one, they unquestionably occupy the centre ground and they just need to stay put.

I listened with interest to a stimulating debate earlier today concerning the welfare state as envisaged by William Beveridge in 1942. One thing emerged beyond any reasonable doubt. Britian today is a very different place to the one he was faced with 70 years ago. Following the Second World War, Britain was all but bankrupt (although many would question what's so different today!). On the flip side, there was work for anyone who wanted it because the rebuild had to begin. Coinciding with the launch of the Welfare State was the launch of the NHS. The latter is today the second largest employer in the world and provided labour to the masses following the years of war. However, other parts of the Public Sector have not fared so well since then. Notably, the armed forces are a mere fraction of their size then. Also, people tended to stay in jobs for life in those days with aspiration existing for the few rather than the many. National industries abounded with coal, rail and steel leading the way. Truly, if Beveridge saw Britain today, he would barely recognise it. The system espoused by Beveridge was actually based on full employment with unemployment to reach no more than 3%. Oh that we had that now!Of the measures he did introduce, child benefit is notably still with us broadly in its original format.

It is though the five principles upon which his new system would be based for which he will forever remain synonymous. He aspired to eradicate the five evils of want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. Some of these words seem a little dated now but their meaning is clear enough. In effect, Beveridge was an altruist. His aim was that anyone out of work should receive a minimum standard of living below which nobody should be allowed to go. It is therefore easy to see why some people become a little hot under the collar when they read reports of people on welfare with large plasma screened televisions and the other trappings of today's consumer society. If I am to understand the proposals of Harriet Harman correctly, you may not even reach the minimum standard of living if you have not made sufficient contributions. If this is true, she intends to take us back to the dark days of pre-war Britain. Over the years, disease has been one of the unquestionable success stories of the welfare state with excellent national vaccination programmes underpinning an NHS which continues to prolong life expectancy. In 1942, men and women were very lucky to reach their three score years and ten. The rates of smoking continue to fall even though the young continue to be lured. Ignorance is the by-product of education and it is debatable if education is better, worse or just different. For one thing, standards of basic arithmetic and grammar have been eroded by a succession of Education ministers intent on ignoring the building blocks. As we consume more and buy more, we generate more rubbish and accumulate more possessions. Squalor? I certainly don't think our predecessors of 1942 threw away a fraction of what we do today. They made do with what they had because they had to. They did not have the choice not to. We do and therein lies the problem.

For all that, it will be the fifth and final evil which will dominate the debates over the next two years. Idleness. It is a highly judgmental word and political dynamite. Its very mention generates a sea of journalistic vitriol in the tabloids. When people like Mick Philpott dominate the headlines for all the wrong reasons, it is his perceived idleness upon which the media will seize. Had Mick Philpott been restricted by his contributions, we can safely assume that his progeny would have amounted to rather less than seventeen. The question is, where do you draw the line. It is the right of every man and woman to have children - unless they happen to be Chinese of course. What shall we say? Four children? Five? Six? Its not so easy now is it? Well, in a way it is because under the new welfare changes, those out of work will not be able to earn more than those who are working. This sounds like stating the obvious but for a long time, it has been quite possible to earn more by not working. That was never the intention of Beveridge and so perhaps George Osborne is right when he claims that most people back his changes. Time, as ever, will tell but if the early sparring today is a barometer of the prize fight, the referee will stop the contest after the first round at this rate.     

The Language of Fear

It was alarming today to see people queueing with their children at special immunisation clinics in South Wales. The latest measles outbreak is a legacy of the now discredited claims of Andrew Wakefield first published in the Lancet in1998. His claim of a link between the vaccine and subsequent cases of autism have since been put firmly in their place. That said, the Lancet chose to publish a paper whose evidence base was conspicuous by its absence. It goes to show that even revered journals such as this can get it wrong sometimes. It is alarming though to see people queueing for a vaccine in 2013. This should serve as a wake up call for the medical authorities. In the aftermath of the controversy, I feel that too little was done in terms of national campaigns to win back the trust of the public. I hope that no fatalities ensue from this episode and that journals pay more attention to the potential after effects of their publications. Trust is a priceless commodity and seldom moreso than in the context of human healthcare. It is easily lost and regained at great cost.

It is sometimes better to just stand there and look stupid rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt. So said Mark Twain in the nineteenth century. I wonder if Ed Balls is aware of this dictum? His latest tirade against government welfare changes will do great damage to his party. At the last election, Labour garnered a record low 29% of the national vote. If they are to make serious amends for that showing, they need to be more considered and be a little more clear about what they intend to do that is different to what is already being done. As their erstwhile supremo Peter Mandelsohn recently said, it is not enough to keep promising to spend your way out of trouble when that policy landed us where we are now. They need to tell us something new which will set them apart from the coalition. For now we will have to wait. It was to the surprise of many when the newly appointed Ed Milliband turned to Balls for the role of Shadow Chancellor. I was astonished because the only episode with which Mr. Balls is immediately synonymous is his decade long association with Gordon Brown at the treasury during the Viv Nicholson years of New Labour. On reflection though, the apppointment of Balls actually made sense. In the film The Godfather, Don Corleone offers the sage advice, "Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer". On this basis. it is easier to understand why Ed Milliband chose to appoint Balls to his most senior position. Amid the news story of the Milliband brothers competing for the Labour leadership, many forget that Ed Balls was a prominent runner in that race. He clearly harbours greater ambitions and seems reluctant to sit quietly in opposition. The only other person Ed Milliband needed to keep closer was his own brother but that particular problem was recently resolved with the departure of David to North America.

I was also surprised to hear George Osborne making an error of judgement this week. His comments in the immediate aftermath of the sentencing of the Mick Philpott were knee-jerk to say the least. If he sought a debate on welfare reform, he certainly has one now. Although his words were clever enough, they were cannon fodder for the tabloid press. The inference was clear enough. How many more Mick Philpotts are out there and should we be financing them? It is very dangerous ground for the Conservatives. Thankfully, Mick Philpott was newsworthy due to the rarity of his deeds and lifestyle. As with anything in life, there will always be a minority who seek to take advantage with the risk of ruining things for everyone else. If there are so many people seeking work in our country today, we need to address the reasons why. Are they suitably qualified for the jobs on offer? Do the available jobs pay sufficiently well to be able to make a living? Is the government doing enough to help them? I don't think a debate is needed regarding the Philpotts of this world because they are mercifully small in number.

I was pleased and surprised to read about a job centre in Colchester whose approach to those out of work is being rolled out nationally and being held up as a shing example of how job centres should operate. Their achievement could have been suggested by anybody with an ounce os sense. They have ensured that if you are seeking work, you will see the same advisor every time you go to the job centre. How simple is that? Unsurprisingly, it is working very well with the jobless feeling more valued and confident and the advisors feeling they are making a real difference. It makes you wonder how and why job centres have been allowed to operate so badly for so long. It is often the way that an alliance of basic human contact allied to a modicum of common sense reaps rewards and I look forward to seeing the effects of this approach nationally. To be out of work is a soul-destroying experience which erodes self confidence and self worth.It is not that people don't want to work. A decent society would seek to help them and rightly so. A society is judged not by how it handles the good times but rather by how it responds during the bad. This recession has affected a lot of people and few can consider themselves immune from its tremors. 

The language of fear is oft used by the political classes and another wave is expected from North of the Border as the battle for Scottish Independence looms closer. Should Alex Salmond pull off an unlikely win for the nationalists, it will become one of the greatest political victories of modern times. Its legacy would be rather less great because like their Celtic cousins in Wales, they need to be more aware of the dynamics of their relationship with Westminster. With their fat public sectors, Scotland and Wales will inevitably need the Union far more than the Union needs them. This dynamic will only be altered when private sector industry and jobs begin to predominate in the Celtic economies. Thus far, this challenge has remained elusive for both so Scotland needs to demonstrate its credentials beyond the predictable reliance on North Sea Oil. Alex Salmond is a very persuasive orator with an enviable reputation and CV to match. The Scots would do well to balance the realities with the charm and romance. Historically, the language of fear has been beloved of the extreme right and left and has been the touch paper for many a revolution. I saw this week that Unison intend to apply for a one day General Strike. This is the organisation who, more than any other, elected Ed Milliband as Labour leader. It is not surprising that Mr. Milliband has yet to condemn the folly of such an action. Should they be legally permitted to put the strike into action, it will consign Labour to a far longer period of opposition. Set against the track record of Labour under Ed Milliband, New Labour is now beginning to look like a long lost friend. On a serious note though, if Labour is to regain power, it is wavering voters such as myself that it needs to attract. They need to come up with something far better than this. Strikes, like bob-a-job week, are the actions of yesteryear and, at best, would look a little dated. With the advent of the internet age with its social media, I'm surprised social media isn't being better utilised. Still, there's time yet. 

I recently visited Wrexham with my family and was already aware of its struggling high street shops in the town centre. I was shocked and appalled to see that yet another supermarket had been built on its outskirts. At the time of the last census, the wider urban area of Wrexham amounted to just over 63,000 people. They now have on the outskirts of their town one supermarket from each of the "big four". The Tesco and newly built Morrisons are so big, they all but constitute new towns in their own right. To redress this imbalance, the local council has put forward the idea of abolishing car park charges for the town centre to try and save the shops which remain. Stable door and horse spring to mind. I'm glad I'm not a shopkeeper in Wrexham town centre and wonder what justification was used to permit this fourth member of the retail elite. My gripe with supermarkets is that they drive people into their own homes. They do not promote community and they do not bring people together. They make obscene profits and their profit margins are truly eye-watering. They use every gimmick in the book to get you through the door safe in the knowledge that what they lose on the swings, they gain on the roundabouts. Their buying power has permitted alcohol to be used as a loss-leader resulting in the closure of hundreds of community pubs. The only people they need to keep happy are their shareholders and with no discernable competition, this is not exactly challenging. The problem is that permitting supermarkets is easy. Removing them will be the devils own job. 

The promised land

On this day in 1968,a clergyman was shot dead in America. Although this happened seven months before I was born, the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King is beyond question. Race riots ensued and America was never the same again. Before the assassination of Dr. King, America possessed an openly racist society with blacks forced to travel separately to whites. Black America was a second class society with privelege and opportunity largely the reserve of the whites. In all but name, the America of 1968 adhered to a system of apartheid more synonymous with South Africa. Today they have a black President which would have been utterly unthinkable in 1968. On this basis, America, and the West, have come a long way. It would be folly though to claim that the job is done and I hope the good work is continued. While race relations have improved a lot since those stormy days, gun crime sadly continues to occupy the front pages for all the wrong reasons.

My purpose for writing about Dr. King though is to remember him as an orator. I have still never heard anyone better. It is a rare gift indeed to be able to speak publicly in such a way as to command the absolute attention and respect of all those present. Dr. King had that gift like no other. I could never tire of listening to his speeches and invariably feel very humble. The tone and inflections of his voice are incredibly moving. If you have ever listened to his "I have a dream" speech, you will know what I mean. Four years before his untimely death, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his non-violent method of combating race inequality. Like Gandhi before him, his weapon lay between his ears and he used it to great effect.

It was right and proper that the US government declared the day of his death a National Holiday in 1986. The Stevie Wonder song "Happy Birthday" was written for him and the lyrics are always worth a listen. For a man who achieved such a huge amount in his lifetime, it is staggering to consider that he was still not yet 40 at the time of his death. It takes a great man to make a big stand and he needs the courage of his convictions.
As the saying goes, "Some men are born great, some man achieve greatness and some men have greatness thrust upon them". There can be little doubt that Dr. King occupies top spot in the second category.

Humble Pie

Tomorrow marks the anniversary of Ronald Reagan advocating an international ban on the use of chemical weapons. He called for the ban on this day in 1984 and it would be interesting to know what he would have thought of the Gulf War mark II fought on the premise of said chemical weapons.

That said, Reagan was an interesting character. For people of my generation the 1980s was a decade dominated by the Iron Lady over here and the film star over there. Reagan had an enduring charisma. No intellectual he. His prowess came in the delivery of his announcements - he knew how to work his audience. With his grounding in Hollywood, he had received arguably the best training for the biggest job on the block. Many anecdotes still do the rounds regarding Ronnie but I would like to share my favourite with you. Like all such stories, there is little way of verifying its authenticity but I prefer to believe its true simply because it ought to be.

On this particular day, Ronnie was visiting an Old Folks home in Texas and came upon a quiet little old lady sitting in the corner. Never one to miss out on the photo opportunity, Ronnie asked her, "Hi, do you know who I am?". Without batting an eye-lid she replied, "No, but if you go to reception, they'll help you".

There's nothing quite like being put in our place and it probably does us good from time to time if only to keep us in check. What I love about this story is that even the President of the USA isn't too big to be brought down a peg or two. Doubtless, such a conversation would be less likely to take place today in an increasingly media-savvy world. I say that, but it always does to remember that the microphone might still be switched on even if you wish it wasn't. For proof of the latter, nobody can have more cringeworthy recollections than Gordon Brown during his last election campaign.  That "bigoted woman" must haunt him even now..

Sometimes we all say things we regret but the trick is to move on with a smile and seek not to repeat the faux pas in the future. I can remember all too vividly attempting to make polite conversation with the wife of a player in the local cricket team after one of our matches. Not having seen her for a long time, I noticed immediately the tell-tale bump showing and, with a twinkle in my eye, asked her when the baby was due. Her reply will stay with me, "Oh I'm not pregnant, I'm just fat". There's really not a lot you can say to that is there?  

Right or Left?

A media storm has gathered apace following the appointment of Paulo Di Canio as manager of Sunderland FC. To be clear, the storm results from his alleged support of facism in the past. Because this is not so attractive to readers, he is now also being portrayed as a racist. For a player who spent so much time playing for West Ham where he was all but an ethnic minority, this seems somewhat baffling. If there is now an edict preventing people from managing a football club because they have alleged political allegiances at odds with others, it means several managers will have to vacate their positions with immediate effect.

On a separate note, the question of player salaries is not deemed newsworthy. At a time when millions are feeling the pinch financially, it seems to me obscene that football players are routinely payed more in a week than Joe Public earns in a year. It was also interesting to observe David Milliband becoming involved. As a director of this football club, he has been complicit in promoting the widening gap between ordinary workers and hyper-inflated player salaries. Not bad for a Labour politician. Of course, the extent of the fall-out with his brother become clearer last week when he revealed he would be seeking pastures new in New York to work for an organisation called International Rescue. To people of my generation, this is synonymous with Thunderbirds, a children's television programme about a family of puppets seeking to save us from evil. I wish him luck and trust politics now represent his past rather than his future. To be remembered as a former foreign secretary is one thing. To be remembered as a prominent member of Gordon Brown's doomed government is quite another. It is an irony that David Milliband represents a Labour stronghold in the North East where a donkey would get elected if put forward as the new candidate. An irony because it is just the sort of union dominated area which was responsible for the appointment of his brother as Labour leader. His resignation as a director of Sunderland FC marks the closing chapter of the David Owen of his generation. He will be remembered as the nearly man of British politics whose hypocrisy was laid bare for all to see in the end.

Today marks a brave new dawn for the welfare system and NHS in this country. Once we have got past the initial resistance which always accompanies change, the country will begin to feel the benefit. At present the financial strain of these two represents an enormous hand-brake which restricts our progress. The hand-brake has been eased with these latest measures but not disengaged fully. For too long, the welfare system has been the national cash cow. An outbreak of reality is no bad thing. There is a grlarge group of people in our country who lived through the second world war and endured rationing for the best part of a decade and they are still here to tell the tale. I shudder to think what they make of our pampered generation but hope we can emulate their resolve of yesteryear.