In many of my recent posts, I have repeatedly questioned the accountability and worth of my local council. Not the locally elected councillors but rather the employees charged with running it. As with many other councils in the UK, my local council has undoubtedly been subjected to the same cuts as the rest of us as the Coalition seeks to balance the books which they inherited in 2010. The way in which they have approached this challenge has been cynical and underhand which does them little credit.
Just yesterday, new information came to my attention. Under normal circumstances, I would have been flabbergasted but there is now little they could do to surprise me. Following a link on a social media site, I learned of a Freedom of Information request which eventually revealed details of the "Gagging orders" paid out by my local council over the last four years. It's fair to say that this information has been released not because they wanted the public to know but because they have been legally forced to do so.
In 2009/10, 3 gagging orders were paid out by my local council at a cost of £131,962.12. In 2010/11, 2 orders were paid at a cost of £37,500. In 2011/12, 4 were paid out at a cost of £91,963.92 and in 2012/13, 8 were paid out at a total cost of £182,032.24. This means that my local council has paid out a whopping £443,188.28 in the last four years (obviously not including the current financial year!). During the last year, that same council has closed down Rhyl Sun Centre, Prestatyn Nova Centre, the North Wales Bowls Centre and Llanbedr primary school to name but a few. They also tried their very best to close St. Brigid's faith school in Denbigh and have stated their intention to do so by 2018.
A gagging order is issued when the council wants to terminate the employment of an employee and shut them up. To do so, they have to pay a price such that both parties are happy. Thus, rather than go through normal employment tribunals and grievance procedures, they can simply pay off any employee whose face doesn't fit. This is 2014 and this is our council. If this was 1934 in Stalinist Russia, it would be difficult to tell the difference. Put simply, the power has got out of control. It will continue to do so until such time as they are held to account. The £443,188.28 so profligately spent in the last four years was done at a time when Clwyd Leisure (the not-for-profit company charged with running Rhyl Sun Centre) were having their annual budget slashed by £50,000 per annum. You don't need to be a mathematician to see that Rhyl Sun Centre, the Nova Centre and the North Wales Bowls Centre should all still be open. Meanwhile, the current Chief Executive continues to earn more than the Prime Minister!
I feel genuine sympathy for the ordinary council employees who are just trying to do their jobs to the best of their ability with the resources they have. I do take issue though with the spending decisions being made by the more senior personnel. Any outsider looking in at Denbighshire would surely question this track record? It does not reflect well on the people making these poor decisions and it insults the thousands of council tax payers in the county who frankly deserve a lot better. If you pay for a service in your life, you normally expect to get what you pay for. For the people of Denbighshire, such an expectation has for too long been an aspiration instead of a reality. Shame!
In his 1864 novella Notes from Underground, Dostoyevsky referred to the "farce in Schleswig-Holstein". The Schleswig-Holstein question concerned the relationships of the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein with the Danish crown and the German confederation. It was not an easy concept to try and understand and few people did. Famously, the British Statesman Lord Palmerston admitted that "only three people have ever really understood the Schleswig-Holstein business - the Prince Consort who is dead - a German Professor who has gone mad - and I who have forgotten all about it".
In Notes from Underground, Dostoyevsky rejects the concept of Utopian Socialism which would ironically come to dominate Russian life throughout much of the twentieth century. The novella portrays humans as they are which caused great upset among his contemporaries. He portrays humans as irrational, uncooperative and uncontrollable. It is perhaps easy to see why such assertions would cause discomfort. He also claims that human needs can never be satisfied. Many critics consider this novella to be the first example of existentialism in literature and no less a judge than Nietzsche called Dostoyevsky "the only philosopher from whom I had anything to learn".
But just how accurate were the assertions of Dostoyevsky? Are we irrational? Are we uncooperative? Are we uncontrollable? I've not yet met anyone who doesn't tick all three boxes. So why did he cause so much upset? Is it because we would rather not face the realities of our shortcomings or do we genuinely believe these claims don't apply to us?
Lord Browne resigned as Chief Executive of BP in 2007. Since his peerage, he has become active in Government and today highlights a culture which exemplifies the observations made in Notes from Underground. Referring to the civil servants in Whitehall, he expresses his exasperation at their culture. His background in the Private Sector meant that any mistake made was identified and dealt with such that chances of its repetition were negligible. I have worked in such a culture and can concur with him. Things get done. This is the culture of progress. Lord Browne highlights a culture in which mistakes are never admitted and where accountability is non-existent. It must be intensely frustrating for him to be faced with such a culture when he has spent his whole life in a proactive environment. He points to a prevailing culture of blame and denial which renders progress nigh on impossible. Several cases have emerged whereby ministers have recently found themselves having to micro manage a project for fear it won't get done if left to the Civil Servants. If this is true, it begs the worth of bureaucracy. This surely confirms what many have suspected for a long time. Bureaucracy stifles people and stifles progress. While it is intended to promote the most efficient way of completing a task, it all too often acts as a barrier. In short, they are complex, inefficient and inflexible - all the things against which Dostoyevsky warned. Trying to find out who is responsible is like trying to understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. Even Lord Palmerston struggled with that one!
Showing posts with label magician. Show all posts
Showing posts with label magician. Show all posts
Friday, 21 March 2014
Saturday, 15 March 2014
50 years since the US invasion
Next year, the UK will be all of a flutter about the forthcoming General Election. For the majority though, such matters continue to assume little or no relevance to their own lives. What many people do relate to strongly is music. Next year, we will be approaching a significant anniversary in the history of UK popular music.
On April 12th 1965 a little known band from the US shot to the top of the charts both sides of the Atlantic.
At that time, it had become more customary for bands from the UK to go Stateside and make a big impression. The band I refer to had embraced the songs of the man who for many came to epitomise the singer songwriter. That band was called the Byrds and it would be difficult to overstate their influence on the music which would follow. Like many other bands of such huge influence, they did not stay together for very long but long enough for everyone to be familiar with their unique style. They more than anyone brought the songs of Bob Dylan to our consciousness. Nearly fifty years later, it would be all but impossible to get the songs of Bob Dylan out of our consciousness.
The Byrds had emerged from various branches of the popular folk scene in the US whose epicentre was in Greenwich Village. When they started out, the power base of popular music in the US was firmly entrenched in New York. In time, these young troubadours headed out West and became the forerunners of the Hippy Generation and the Summer of Love. By the end of the decade, anyone who was anyone in the US music industry had relocated to Los Angeles. They have been there ever since.
As with many short lived groups of such lasting influence, the Byrds' members were a wide mix of characters whose collective egos limited any chances of lasting. For the time they were together they left us with some of the defining performances of the sixties. Their first hit was their rendition of the Dylan song "Mr Tambourine Man". From the opening chords, a new sound had been born, "Folk rock". The Rickenbacker guitar of singer Roger McGuinn along with the intricate harmonies of Gene Clark and David Crosby formed a unique, dynamic sound. A sound like theirs is ultimately judged in hindsight. I have the 45 single and can assure you that it still sounds really fresh - that is the ultimate measure.
By September of 1967, the other band members had grown tired of David Crosby in the aftermath of the now iconic Monterey festival. Crosby had become too political on stage for their liking and had also annoyed them by playing with Buffalo Springfield at the same festival.
Within a couple of years, Crosby had joined up with Springfield's Stephen Stills and the recently departed Hollies harmony man Graham Nash. The rest as they say is history. The first Crosby, Stills and Nash album came in the wake of their debut appearance at the Woodstock festival. By the time of their second album, they had become hot property and along with Led Zeppelin, were the jewels in the crown of the rapidly expanding Atlantic record label managed so skillfully by the late Ahmet Ertegun. For their second album, they realised that they would need to add to their personnel if only for the purpose of touring to promote the album. For studio recordings, Stephen Stills had played keyboards and lead guitar - clearly impossible on tour with live performances. They returned for another ex-Buffalo Springfield member. The addition of Neil Young created the iconic Deja Vu album which still stands as one of the great recordings from that golden era.
One of my Christmas presents this year was the latest solo album by David Crosby. This is his third release since his first solo effort "If I could only remember my name" in 1971. For a man who has overcome drug addiction and a liver transplant, this latest offering is a revelation. Crosby largely returns to his acoustic roots and those distinctive harmonies feature throughout the album.
This week, the UK lost one of it's greatest social activists with the passing of Tony Benn. While Crosby has never been a politician himself, his entire career has been notable for his political activity. Only recently, Crosby has been performing at Occupy Wall Street with long term harmony partner Graham Nash. Much of the "Hippy nonsense" being spouted by Crosby and his peers in the sixties have since been viewed in a different light. In the half century since those early days, the world is slowly coming around to the basic messages being espoused by the "Hippies". Crosby and his musical friends recognised much of what was going wrong with the world and questioned the madness of war and the extent to which we remained disengaged from the youth in our society. They warned against the ill effects of capitalism and have been proved right on just about every level. People like Crosby were arguably the musical equivalent of Tony Benn. Like him, they have remained true to their core beliefs and principles and continue to fight against the blatant injustices they see all around them. They were campaigning against US involvement in Vietnam in the late sixties. They were proved right. They have been proved right over every single war since then too. Their stance on the growing gulf between the haves and the have-nots is as loud today as it was then - long may it continue.
On April 12th 1965 a little known band from the US shot to the top of the charts both sides of the Atlantic.
At that time, it had become more customary for bands from the UK to go Stateside and make a big impression. The band I refer to had embraced the songs of the man who for many came to epitomise the singer songwriter. That band was called the Byrds and it would be difficult to overstate their influence on the music which would follow. Like many other bands of such huge influence, they did not stay together for very long but long enough for everyone to be familiar with their unique style. They more than anyone brought the songs of Bob Dylan to our consciousness. Nearly fifty years later, it would be all but impossible to get the songs of Bob Dylan out of our consciousness.
The Byrds had emerged from various branches of the popular folk scene in the US whose epicentre was in Greenwich Village. When they started out, the power base of popular music in the US was firmly entrenched in New York. In time, these young troubadours headed out West and became the forerunners of the Hippy Generation and the Summer of Love. By the end of the decade, anyone who was anyone in the US music industry had relocated to Los Angeles. They have been there ever since.
As with many short lived groups of such lasting influence, the Byrds' members were a wide mix of characters whose collective egos limited any chances of lasting. For the time they were together they left us with some of the defining performances of the sixties. Their first hit was their rendition of the Dylan song "Mr Tambourine Man". From the opening chords, a new sound had been born, "Folk rock". The Rickenbacker guitar of singer Roger McGuinn along with the intricate harmonies of Gene Clark and David Crosby formed a unique, dynamic sound. A sound like theirs is ultimately judged in hindsight. I have the 45 single and can assure you that it still sounds really fresh - that is the ultimate measure.
By September of 1967, the other band members had grown tired of David Crosby in the aftermath of the now iconic Monterey festival. Crosby had become too political on stage for their liking and had also annoyed them by playing with Buffalo Springfield at the same festival.
Within a couple of years, Crosby had joined up with Springfield's Stephen Stills and the recently departed Hollies harmony man Graham Nash. The rest as they say is history. The first Crosby, Stills and Nash album came in the wake of their debut appearance at the Woodstock festival. By the time of their second album, they had become hot property and along with Led Zeppelin, were the jewels in the crown of the rapidly expanding Atlantic record label managed so skillfully by the late Ahmet Ertegun. For their second album, they realised that they would need to add to their personnel if only for the purpose of touring to promote the album. For studio recordings, Stephen Stills had played keyboards and lead guitar - clearly impossible on tour with live performances. They returned for another ex-Buffalo Springfield member. The addition of Neil Young created the iconic Deja Vu album which still stands as one of the great recordings from that golden era.
One of my Christmas presents this year was the latest solo album by David Crosby. This is his third release since his first solo effort "If I could only remember my name" in 1971. For a man who has overcome drug addiction and a liver transplant, this latest offering is a revelation. Crosby largely returns to his acoustic roots and those distinctive harmonies feature throughout the album.
This week, the UK lost one of it's greatest social activists with the passing of Tony Benn. While Crosby has never been a politician himself, his entire career has been notable for his political activity. Only recently, Crosby has been performing at Occupy Wall Street with long term harmony partner Graham Nash. Much of the "Hippy nonsense" being spouted by Crosby and his peers in the sixties have since been viewed in a different light. In the half century since those early days, the world is slowly coming around to the basic messages being espoused by the "Hippies". Crosby and his musical friends recognised much of what was going wrong with the world and questioned the madness of war and the extent to which we remained disengaged from the youth in our society. They warned against the ill effects of capitalism and have been proved right on just about every level. People like Crosby were arguably the musical equivalent of Tony Benn. Like him, they have remained true to their core beliefs and principles and continue to fight against the blatant injustices they see all around them. They were campaigning against US involvement in Vietnam in the late sixties. They were proved right. They have been proved right over every single war since then too. Their stance on the growing gulf between the haves and the have-nots is as loud today as it was then - long may it continue.
Saturday, 8 March 2014
What would Joseph Ablett think?
Fund raising has often been used to achieve the objectives of local communities. Such initiatives are frequently given their initial impetus by the generosity of altruistic benefactors. Such an example arose in my home county of Denbighshire in 1842. To fully understand why Joseph Ablett of Llanbedr Hall donated 20 acres of land in Denbigh towards the building of a mental asylum for North Wales, it is instructive to consider the events which led to the need for such an institution.
It would take too long to cover every aspect so I will stick to the more salient points. Prior to the North Wales Mental Hospital in Denbigh, any person in North Wales with an acute mental illness was sent to the nearest asylum in Gloucester. Most Welsh patients spoke no English and most English asylum staff spoke no Welsh. Hardly an ideal environment within which to achieve effective treatment.
That the North Wales Hospital was even built in the first place was little short of a miracle. The case of an emaciated Welsh woman living above the smithy in Llanrhaeadr-yng-nghinmeirch was cited in a speech in the House of Commons. The appalling details of Mary Jones were referred to by Lord Ashley in his Commons speech of 1844. He informed the house that "If they went to the Principality, they would find that the insane were too often treated as no man of feeling would treat his dog".
Following the generous donation of land by Joseph Ablett, the fund raising was given a further boost by financial input from both Queen Victoria and the Prince of Wales. The rest as they say is history. The eventual North Wales Hospital was nothing short of a cultural icon. It provided asylum for the mentally ill of Anglesey, Caernarfonshire, Meirionedd, Flintshire and Denbighshire. To the rest of the United Kingdom, the North Wales Hospital achieved legendary status often blazing the trail which others would follow. As with all institutions of it's era, it had it's fair share of bad practice but it also achieved so much good.
The decision which brought about it's closure are beginning to be judged with the hindsight of the intervening twenty years. It does not make for attractive reading. The way in which this once great building was allowed to disintegrate was a shocking indictment on those involved. The efforts which made that once impressive institution were cynically undone within a couple of decades. To end the sorry story, the vultures have finally descended. Hiding behind the comfort of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO), the present local council has announced it's plans to go ahead with re-developing the site.
In modern parlance, this means that they intend to cash in on the enormous value of the real estate. With the luxury of a CPO, they can do so unopposed and will doubtless do so. That they are getting involved in the site at all is only because they are being forced to do so. Had the original building not been made so unsafe by successive hoards of adventurers and looters, there would have been no legal need for the council to become involved. Once the roof had become a threat to health following the terrible fire, their hand was forced. It could scarcely have been forced more conveniently in the long history of the council. In having to spend £900,000 to make the roof safe, they now had their motive to pursue a CPO in essence to recover their costs. If the credentials of the buyers since 1995 had been properly scrutinised, things would never have come to this. It's all very well whinging that the holding company is based in the British Virgin Islands, but the current owner was made to wait four years when it applied for planning permission. How long will it take for the council to be granted planning consent following the inevitable CPO? Four years? I doubt that very much.
In my naivety, I had assumed that a CPO was only going to be granted if the original building was restores to it's original glory. Such an eventuality would of course be impossible anyway given that all items of historic value have long since been stolen and flogged. Such items are naturally irreplacable. The plans for the re-development (which will go ahead irrespective of what local people say) are soon to go on display. This charade will comply with the formal legal requirements. The former hospital building will become luxury apartments. Not for the mentally ill (the have-nots) but instead for those with the means to buy them (The haves). The land will sprout houses like mushrooms on a dewy September morning. So who will profit by all of this? Joseph Ablett? No, because his donation was altruistic for the benefit of the people of North Wales. The people of North Wales? No, because the majority won't have a hope in hell's chance of even being able to afford one of these houses. The people of Denbighshire? No, because any profits made out of this venture will rest with the council charged with providing for them. On the basis of recent evidence, I can confidently predict that the people of Denbighshire will not be the winners. The people of Denbigh? No, but doubtless the council will contend that the re-development will bring more trade to our local High Street just like when they sanctioned the building of the Safeway supermarket on the former Smithfield Market site. The council? Absolutely - every step of the way.
If Joseph Ablett came back to see these plans, I wonder what he would think? I wonder what he would say? The North Wales Hospital was so called because it served the people of North Wales. All of North Wales from Holyhead to Aberdovey to Bala to Chirk to Flint and everywhere in between. Even as I write, the vultures with money will be circling ready to make a fast buck out of the new homes. They will rent them for income or sit on them for a few years to make capital. From where I'm sitting, it doesn't read well and doesn't feel right. It is as though the founding principles and needs upon which the hospital was built count for nothing.
Acute bed space for the mentally ill in North Wales has seldom been more stretched. My family has known of acute cases where people with immediate needs have been placed on general medical wards. So how far have we come in the twenty years since it's closure? Has community care been the solution? Can anyone think of a more amazing monument of human endeavour so needlessly and wrecklessly abandoned in the name of progress? I've tried hard to think of one but I can't. I have though formed a clear view on the lack of principle underpinning a CPO. I am more opposed than ever to CPOs having seen them abused by so many councils in so many different places. I would struggle to think of a less democratic process if I tried.
It would take too long to cover every aspect so I will stick to the more salient points. Prior to the North Wales Mental Hospital in Denbigh, any person in North Wales with an acute mental illness was sent to the nearest asylum in Gloucester. Most Welsh patients spoke no English and most English asylum staff spoke no Welsh. Hardly an ideal environment within which to achieve effective treatment.
That the North Wales Hospital was even built in the first place was little short of a miracle. The case of an emaciated Welsh woman living above the smithy in Llanrhaeadr-yng-nghinmeirch was cited in a speech in the House of Commons. The appalling details of Mary Jones were referred to by Lord Ashley in his Commons speech of 1844. He informed the house that "If they went to the Principality, they would find that the insane were too often treated as no man of feeling would treat his dog".
Following the generous donation of land by Joseph Ablett, the fund raising was given a further boost by financial input from both Queen Victoria and the Prince of Wales. The rest as they say is history. The eventual North Wales Hospital was nothing short of a cultural icon. It provided asylum for the mentally ill of Anglesey, Caernarfonshire, Meirionedd, Flintshire and Denbighshire. To the rest of the United Kingdom, the North Wales Hospital achieved legendary status often blazing the trail which others would follow. As with all institutions of it's era, it had it's fair share of bad practice but it also achieved so much good.
The decision which brought about it's closure are beginning to be judged with the hindsight of the intervening twenty years. It does not make for attractive reading. The way in which this once great building was allowed to disintegrate was a shocking indictment on those involved. The efforts which made that once impressive institution were cynically undone within a couple of decades. To end the sorry story, the vultures have finally descended. Hiding behind the comfort of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO), the present local council has announced it's plans to go ahead with re-developing the site.
In modern parlance, this means that they intend to cash in on the enormous value of the real estate. With the luxury of a CPO, they can do so unopposed and will doubtless do so. That they are getting involved in the site at all is only because they are being forced to do so. Had the original building not been made so unsafe by successive hoards of adventurers and looters, there would have been no legal need for the council to become involved. Once the roof had become a threat to health following the terrible fire, their hand was forced. It could scarcely have been forced more conveniently in the long history of the council. In having to spend £900,000 to make the roof safe, they now had their motive to pursue a CPO in essence to recover their costs. If the credentials of the buyers since 1995 had been properly scrutinised, things would never have come to this. It's all very well whinging that the holding company is based in the British Virgin Islands, but the current owner was made to wait four years when it applied for planning permission. How long will it take for the council to be granted planning consent following the inevitable CPO? Four years? I doubt that very much.
In my naivety, I had assumed that a CPO was only going to be granted if the original building was restores to it's original glory. Such an eventuality would of course be impossible anyway given that all items of historic value have long since been stolen and flogged. Such items are naturally irreplacable. The plans for the re-development (which will go ahead irrespective of what local people say) are soon to go on display. This charade will comply with the formal legal requirements. The former hospital building will become luxury apartments. Not for the mentally ill (the have-nots) but instead for those with the means to buy them (The haves). The land will sprout houses like mushrooms on a dewy September morning. So who will profit by all of this? Joseph Ablett? No, because his donation was altruistic for the benefit of the people of North Wales. The people of North Wales? No, because the majority won't have a hope in hell's chance of even being able to afford one of these houses. The people of Denbighshire? No, because any profits made out of this venture will rest with the council charged with providing for them. On the basis of recent evidence, I can confidently predict that the people of Denbighshire will not be the winners. The people of Denbigh? No, but doubtless the council will contend that the re-development will bring more trade to our local High Street just like when they sanctioned the building of the Safeway supermarket on the former Smithfield Market site. The council? Absolutely - every step of the way.
If Joseph Ablett came back to see these plans, I wonder what he would think? I wonder what he would say? The North Wales Hospital was so called because it served the people of North Wales. All of North Wales from Holyhead to Aberdovey to Bala to Chirk to Flint and everywhere in between. Even as I write, the vultures with money will be circling ready to make a fast buck out of the new homes. They will rent them for income or sit on them for a few years to make capital. From where I'm sitting, it doesn't read well and doesn't feel right. It is as though the founding principles and needs upon which the hospital was built count for nothing.
Acute bed space for the mentally ill in North Wales has seldom been more stretched. My family has known of acute cases where people with immediate needs have been placed on general medical wards. So how far have we come in the twenty years since it's closure? Has community care been the solution? Can anyone think of a more amazing monument of human endeavour so needlessly and wrecklessly abandoned in the name of progress? I've tried hard to think of one but I can't. I have though formed a clear view on the lack of principle underpinning a CPO. I am more opposed than ever to CPOs having seen them abused by so many councils in so many different places. I would struggle to think of a less democratic process if I tried.
Saturday, 1 March 2014
The Proof of the Pudding..
Many of my recent pieces have focused on the town where I live. In seeking to highlight the good points and identify any areas where the town can improve, I have sought the opinions and input of the local community through a social media group. I have really enjoyed observing discussions unfold as people chew the fat over what is already good and what they feel is lacking. A recurrent theme which came up repeatedly was the need for the town centre to have a regular street market as indeed it used to when I was a child.
Sometimes people get together and work hard to make something happen only to be thwarted by circumstances beyond their control such as adverse weather. Today was St. David's Day and a huge amount of planning and preparation had been undertaken by Rhodd Dinbych. It was St. David's Day and it was the last Saturday of half term with our children returning to school on Monday. When I woke up this morning I was thrilled to see that the sun was shining with barely a cloud in the sky.
At 10.00 I took my son to see all the stalls and the entertainment. The variety and quality of the stalls was truly amazing and the efforts to which a great many people had gone were self evident. Crown Square has become notable of late for the Crown Hotel standing empty. Today, it didn't matter because there was too much going on for anyone to even notice. In front of the Crown Hotel was a falconer with a marvellous array of owls, hawks and buzzards. He more than made up for the Crown Hotel being empty and we had to wait about 10 minutes just to get near him due to the large numbers in front of us.
Live music was being played outside the town hall and I was particularly impressed by the playing of the Celtic harp. We sat with many others just taking in the atmosphere. Atmosphere is a strange commodity. You can't buy atmosphere and it was on tap in Denbigh today. Next stop was the market hall. I'm glad I only had one shopping bag with me or I would have been bankrupt. There was so much fantastic produce and crafts on show. Young or old, there really was something for everyone. Every time I looked around me, the crowd seemed to have doubled again. The mixture of local exhibitors and those who had come from far further afield was enticing. As ever, I succumbed to the olives which had come from Cyprus - literally. To be able to speak to the Cypriot man who had grown them was a privilege. At every stall, we were met with waves of friendly goodwill. This was Denbigh at it's very best.
Whatever your views of this great town, today proved one thing beyond debate. If the people get behind it, anything is possible. To the people who made today happen, all credit to you. I've read people recently pointing out that the supermarkets are convenient because you can get everything under one roof. Well, I beg to differ because I saw so many things on the street in Denbigh today which you would never find in a million years in a supermarket. I also experienced a warmth of atmosphere which the supermarkets can only dream of. But above all I saw what happens when a local community gets together and pools it's resources and I saw what happens when the town en masse comes out to support it's own. As an avowed proponent of localism, I only hope to see more days like this one in Denbigh. Well done to all concerned and please keep up the excellent work. Well done too to the people of Denbigh for getting behind the event and coming out in such large numbers to support it.
This was the impression it left on me. The impression it left on my six year old son is priceless because his is the generation with whom we need to engage. Today, Denbigh did that in spades. Llongyfarchiadau i bawb!
Sometimes people get together and work hard to make something happen only to be thwarted by circumstances beyond their control such as adverse weather. Today was St. David's Day and a huge amount of planning and preparation had been undertaken by Rhodd Dinbych. It was St. David's Day and it was the last Saturday of half term with our children returning to school on Monday. When I woke up this morning I was thrilled to see that the sun was shining with barely a cloud in the sky.
At 10.00 I took my son to see all the stalls and the entertainment. The variety and quality of the stalls was truly amazing and the efforts to which a great many people had gone were self evident. Crown Square has become notable of late for the Crown Hotel standing empty. Today, it didn't matter because there was too much going on for anyone to even notice. In front of the Crown Hotel was a falconer with a marvellous array of owls, hawks and buzzards. He more than made up for the Crown Hotel being empty and we had to wait about 10 minutes just to get near him due to the large numbers in front of us.
Live music was being played outside the town hall and I was particularly impressed by the playing of the Celtic harp. We sat with many others just taking in the atmosphere. Atmosphere is a strange commodity. You can't buy atmosphere and it was on tap in Denbigh today. Next stop was the market hall. I'm glad I only had one shopping bag with me or I would have been bankrupt. There was so much fantastic produce and crafts on show. Young or old, there really was something for everyone. Every time I looked around me, the crowd seemed to have doubled again. The mixture of local exhibitors and those who had come from far further afield was enticing. As ever, I succumbed to the olives which had come from Cyprus - literally. To be able to speak to the Cypriot man who had grown them was a privilege. At every stall, we were met with waves of friendly goodwill. This was Denbigh at it's very best.
Whatever your views of this great town, today proved one thing beyond debate. If the people get behind it, anything is possible. To the people who made today happen, all credit to you. I've read people recently pointing out that the supermarkets are convenient because you can get everything under one roof. Well, I beg to differ because I saw so many things on the street in Denbigh today which you would never find in a million years in a supermarket. I also experienced a warmth of atmosphere which the supermarkets can only dream of. But above all I saw what happens when a local community gets together and pools it's resources and I saw what happens when the town en masse comes out to support it's own. As an avowed proponent of localism, I only hope to see more days like this one in Denbigh. Well done to all concerned and please keep up the excellent work. Well done too to the people of Denbigh for getting behind the event and coming out in such large numbers to support it.
This was the impression it left on me. The impression it left on my six year old son is priceless because his is the generation with whom we need to engage. Today, Denbigh did that in spades. Llongyfarchiadau i bawb!
Thursday, 20 February 2014
Hunger in a Civilised World
The decision by our most prominent Church leaders to write an open letter protesting at the growing numbers of people needing food is a long overdue debate. The growth of food banks has been well documented in recent times as many of us have continued to feel the after effects of the recession.
All recessions result in misery and it is sadly the poorest in society who inevitably fare the worst as jobs become more scarce. The debate this morning on the Today programme concentrated on how to solve this problem. While I applaud that approach, I would also urge people to engage in seeking the cause. If the cause is removed, the problem will be addressed more effectively.
As I write, we live in a purportedly civilised society. Food waste has never been so high. In equal measure, the general public and the all conquering supermarkets must both shoulder their share of the blame. I would struggle to think of a more immoral scenario than this one. On the one hand, we have increasing numbers of people going hungry (this is 2014) and increasing levels of food being thrown away. Yes, we have food banks and for some they have literally become a lifeline. As the welfare budget has been cut, those dependent upon it have become ever more squeezed.
Did the new Government in 2010 have the choice to maintain the welfare budget? Sadly, I don't think they did. They have introduced a new system which encourages people to work if they are able to do so but this is not a new system. This is the very system upon which Beveridge built the Welfare State after the war. One of the problems has been the way in which successive Governments have allowed the budget to rise. In so doing, they have perpetuated a culture of dependency upon it. The Welfare State was never designed for such an outcome. I have genuine sympathy for the disabled, carers and those genuinely unable to work. These are the very people for whom the Welfare State was designed. I was a carer for my first wife for over two years and received the princely sum of £11 per week for the privilege. It's not that I wasn't grateful for that money because I most certainly was. It's just that it was patently insufficient and in no way recognised the true worth of the millions of carers who continue to work for their loved ones every day. The money they save the NHS is incalculable.
When a new Government comes to power, it is faced with assessing the state of the nation's finances before it can start making promises about spending money and this Coalition was no different. We can argue about the speed of the cuts but we can't argue about the need to make them. Our country was in a financial mess and they have had the thankless task of addressing that. I do not profess political allegiance to the Coalition but I do recognise that they had to take the decision they took. Whether the deficit was caused by the outgoing Labour party or the Global recession or a combination of the two is frankly irrelevant now.
But the real question remains; why are people going hungry? In truth there are many reasons for this. I find it interesting that religious leaders have entered the fray at a time when religion has seldom seemed less relevant. They deserve great credit for initiating the debate. In the days when our churches were well attended, a man would not stand by and witness his fellow man suffer the indignity of hunger. I certainly wouldn't. The demise of our community spirit has contributed largely to this and has been brought about by a succession of ill advised policies.
I listened to the CEO of British Gas (Centrica ) this morning defending the prices being charged by his company. It is reported that 3% have left in the last year with many more expected to follow. That is one glimmer of good news in that the competition within the energy market is beginning to warm up. If we still had our coal industry, this problem need not be as bad as it is. Still, we are where we are so we must look forwards and not back. Looking forwards, we need to invest in strategies which will reduce the cruel levels of fuel poverty. Having to choose between heating or eating is a tough choice. It is all the more so when you are an elderly person living alone. Again, if our community was functioning as it once did (and as it still should), we would not stand by and tolerate such an outcome.
I have recently highlighted the need to support our local high streets. The main reason why I support this so passionately is that this constitutes the community hub. The church, the pub, the cafe, the grocer, the butcher, the cobbler. The list goes on but these services should be at the centre of our lives - not on the periphery. The supermarkets should be on the periphery but a succession of Governments both national and local have welcomed them with open arms. Had they stopped for one minute to consider the consequences, they might not have been so quick to do so. The effect on local jobs has been catastrophic but the effects on local community has been devastating. A vibrant high street correlates with a vibrant community spirit and if you don't believe me go to towns like Barnsley (overtly Labour), Ludlow (overtly Tory) and others. They demonstrate that you can have a healthy high street in spite of one of the supermarkets. Politics has little to do with it. This is all about people making community choices when they spend their money - if they want to live within a strong community. It is the role of our independent high street shops to be community orientated and distance themselves from the cynical marketing ploys of the share holder driven supermarkets. We pay our money and we take our choice...
I listened yesterday to an interesting programme exploring the recent trend which has seen the big four supermarkets see their takings stagnate while the discounters such as LIDL and Aldi have prospered. An expert was charged with buying the same basket of shopping fro LIDL and Tesco. They were not buying foie gras - just basic food such as bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, cereal etc. The basket from LIDL costed £17. The equivalent basket from Tesco costed £27. Even with a clubcard, that is an almighty difference for the many millions living on or near the bread line.
But how far have we sunk when supermarkets are throwing food in to skips at the rear of their premises and seeking to prosecute those trying to rescue some of that food for their consumption. How much food are we all throwing away and why are we doing that? What do food banks represent to us? Do we see them as solutions for the needy or do we see them as an indictment of our civilised society?
All recessions result in misery and it is sadly the poorest in society who inevitably fare the worst as jobs become more scarce. The debate this morning on the Today programme concentrated on how to solve this problem. While I applaud that approach, I would also urge people to engage in seeking the cause. If the cause is removed, the problem will be addressed more effectively.
As I write, we live in a purportedly civilised society. Food waste has never been so high. In equal measure, the general public and the all conquering supermarkets must both shoulder their share of the blame. I would struggle to think of a more immoral scenario than this one. On the one hand, we have increasing numbers of people going hungry (this is 2014) and increasing levels of food being thrown away. Yes, we have food banks and for some they have literally become a lifeline. As the welfare budget has been cut, those dependent upon it have become ever more squeezed.
Did the new Government in 2010 have the choice to maintain the welfare budget? Sadly, I don't think they did. They have introduced a new system which encourages people to work if they are able to do so but this is not a new system. This is the very system upon which Beveridge built the Welfare State after the war. One of the problems has been the way in which successive Governments have allowed the budget to rise. In so doing, they have perpetuated a culture of dependency upon it. The Welfare State was never designed for such an outcome. I have genuine sympathy for the disabled, carers and those genuinely unable to work. These are the very people for whom the Welfare State was designed. I was a carer for my first wife for over two years and received the princely sum of £11 per week for the privilege. It's not that I wasn't grateful for that money because I most certainly was. It's just that it was patently insufficient and in no way recognised the true worth of the millions of carers who continue to work for their loved ones every day. The money they save the NHS is incalculable.
When a new Government comes to power, it is faced with assessing the state of the nation's finances before it can start making promises about spending money and this Coalition was no different. We can argue about the speed of the cuts but we can't argue about the need to make them. Our country was in a financial mess and they have had the thankless task of addressing that. I do not profess political allegiance to the Coalition but I do recognise that they had to take the decision they took. Whether the deficit was caused by the outgoing Labour party or the Global recession or a combination of the two is frankly irrelevant now.
But the real question remains; why are people going hungry? In truth there are many reasons for this. I find it interesting that religious leaders have entered the fray at a time when religion has seldom seemed less relevant. They deserve great credit for initiating the debate. In the days when our churches were well attended, a man would not stand by and witness his fellow man suffer the indignity of hunger. I certainly wouldn't. The demise of our community spirit has contributed largely to this and has been brought about by a succession of ill advised policies.
I listened to the CEO of British Gas (Centrica ) this morning defending the prices being charged by his company. It is reported that 3% have left in the last year with many more expected to follow. That is one glimmer of good news in that the competition within the energy market is beginning to warm up. If we still had our coal industry, this problem need not be as bad as it is. Still, we are where we are so we must look forwards and not back. Looking forwards, we need to invest in strategies which will reduce the cruel levels of fuel poverty. Having to choose between heating or eating is a tough choice. It is all the more so when you are an elderly person living alone. Again, if our community was functioning as it once did (and as it still should), we would not stand by and tolerate such an outcome.
I have recently highlighted the need to support our local high streets. The main reason why I support this so passionately is that this constitutes the community hub. The church, the pub, the cafe, the grocer, the butcher, the cobbler. The list goes on but these services should be at the centre of our lives - not on the periphery. The supermarkets should be on the periphery but a succession of Governments both national and local have welcomed them with open arms. Had they stopped for one minute to consider the consequences, they might not have been so quick to do so. The effect on local jobs has been catastrophic but the effects on local community has been devastating. A vibrant high street correlates with a vibrant community spirit and if you don't believe me go to towns like Barnsley (overtly Labour), Ludlow (overtly Tory) and others. They demonstrate that you can have a healthy high street in spite of one of the supermarkets. Politics has little to do with it. This is all about people making community choices when they spend their money - if they want to live within a strong community. It is the role of our independent high street shops to be community orientated and distance themselves from the cynical marketing ploys of the share holder driven supermarkets. We pay our money and we take our choice...
I listened yesterday to an interesting programme exploring the recent trend which has seen the big four supermarkets see their takings stagnate while the discounters such as LIDL and Aldi have prospered. An expert was charged with buying the same basket of shopping fro LIDL and Tesco. They were not buying foie gras - just basic food such as bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, cereal etc. The basket from LIDL costed £17. The equivalent basket from Tesco costed £27. Even with a clubcard, that is an almighty difference for the many millions living on or near the bread line.
But how far have we sunk when supermarkets are throwing food in to skips at the rear of their premises and seeking to prosecute those trying to rescue some of that food for their consumption. How much food are we all throwing away and why are we doing that? What do food banks represent to us? Do we see them as solutions for the needy or do we see them as an indictment of our civilised society?
Monday, 10 February 2014
Localism! But which version?
To be living in Denbighshire at the moment is to witness what happens when local government is given too much power without any recognised accountability. The Labour leader today pledged to back localism at the forthcoming local elections and beyond. But what exactly does he mean by localism? You won't be surprised to learn that several versions exist.
Miliband refers to a devolution of power from central government to local government. His was the government which did this more than any other between 1997 and 2010 so I suppose he simply intends to embark on more of the same. Nothing wrong with that per se except that it isn't always easy to see who is supposed to benefit. I had been under the impression that the winners were supposed to be members of the public. Where I live, that has recently become something of an aspiration rather than a reality. Whether our council is just typical of the national picture I 'm not sure but they currently seem intent on closing as many public services as they can. But maybe that isn't a bad thing either. As services become ever more scarce, people might have to divert their dependent gaze away from their local council and towards each other.
The latter broadly fits my understanding of localism. In the town where I live, there seems to be a simmering under current of people engaging with each other in terms of business ideas, social enterprise initiatives and ventures aimed at benefiting the local community. As I write, it's hard to gauge how big this group of people is but I've seen enough to know that it is growing. As people have become successively impoverished during the growing social inequality generated by our obsession with economic growth, they have understandably become more agitated. If you leave heat under a pan of cold water for long enough, the molecules become agitated and, in time, they begin to simmer. Eventually, they will reach boiling point.
I know many people who are contending with considerable heat at the moment and I suspect this is what is driving the local initiatives to which I refer. Whatever the source, the outcome is the key. We are fast approaching a straightforward choice between globalism and localism. In most communities, the former seems to be holding the advantage principally on account of its wealth advantage. For localism to seize back the initiative, it will just take sufficient numbers of local people with enough in common to forge their own route and turn their backs on globalism.
Before the old Gods were replaced by money, we know that most people existed by swapping goods and services through various systems of barter. In a piece last year, I highlighted the Spanish community of Marinelda to illustrate where I saw communities going in the years to come. Since I wrote that piece, my view has only been strengthened. I have never known so many ordinary people so utterly disinterested in the political system. I have every sympathy with them because the current system seems to have run out of ideas. Whether that political system is at a national or local level is largely academic because they are so difficult to distinguish.
It is said that the mobile phone giant Nokia fell from grace because it was being run by too many people from the same background with the same ideas and the same view of the world. Unable to consider alternative views, they were unable to cope with the threat of Samsung when it did come. The analogies are compelling. In a recent attempt to gain some insight in to what it was that local people would most want to see return to their high street, the leading response was very revealing. The majority expressed a desire for a dedicated market day. Hardly high tech I think you'd agree so what's the big attraction. Well, I would suggest it's people. There is nothing more basic or meaningful than real human contact and the street market is part of our heritage. This is the place where people come together to trade, to chat, to eat, to discuss and most importantly, to be with their fellow man. It will be interesting to see what my town will look like ten years hence. Will it be Tesco Express, Starbucks and Waitrose or will it return to it's ancestral roots? The people will decide...
Miliband refers to a devolution of power from central government to local government. His was the government which did this more than any other between 1997 and 2010 so I suppose he simply intends to embark on more of the same. Nothing wrong with that per se except that it isn't always easy to see who is supposed to benefit. I had been under the impression that the winners were supposed to be members of the public. Where I live, that has recently become something of an aspiration rather than a reality. Whether our council is just typical of the national picture I 'm not sure but they currently seem intent on closing as many public services as they can. But maybe that isn't a bad thing either. As services become ever more scarce, people might have to divert their dependent gaze away from their local council and towards each other.
The latter broadly fits my understanding of localism. In the town where I live, there seems to be a simmering under current of people engaging with each other in terms of business ideas, social enterprise initiatives and ventures aimed at benefiting the local community. As I write, it's hard to gauge how big this group of people is but I've seen enough to know that it is growing. As people have become successively impoverished during the growing social inequality generated by our obsession with economic growth, they have understandably become more agitated. If you leave heat under a pan of cold water for long enough, the molecules become agitated and, in time, they begin to simmer. Eventually, they will reach boiling point.
I know many people who are contending with considerable heat at the moment and I suspect this is what is driving the local initiatives to which I refer. Whatever the source, the outcome is the key. We are fast approaching a straightforward choice between globalism and localism. In most communities, the former seems to be holding the advantage principally on account of its wealth advantage. For localism to seize back the initiative, it will just take sufficient numbers of local people with enough in common to forge their own route and turn their backs on globalism.
Before the old Gods were replaced by money, we know that most people existed by swapping goods and services through various systems of barter. In a piece last year, I highlighted the Spanish community of Marinelda to illustrate where I saw communities going in the years to come. Since I wrote that piece, my view has only been strengthened. I have never known so many ordinary people so utterly disinterested in the political system. I have every sympathy with them because the current system seems to have run out of ideas. Whether that political system is at a national or local level is largely academic because they are so difficult to distinguish.
It is said that the mobile phone giant Nokia fell from grace because it was being run by too many people from the same background with the same ideas and the same view of the world. Unable to consider alternative views, they were unable to cope with the threat of Samsung when it did come. The analogies are compelling. In a recent attempt to gain some insight in to what it was that local people would most want to see return to their high street, the leading response was very revealing. The majority expressed a desire for a dedicated market day. Hardly high tech I think you'd agree so what's the big attraction. Well, I would suggest it's people. There is nothing more basic or meaningful than real human contact and the street market is part of our heritage. This is the place where people come together to trade, to chat, to eat, to discuss and most importantly, to be with their fellow man. It will be interesting to see what my town will look like ten years hence. Will it be Tesco Express, Starbucks and Waitrose or will it return to it's ancestral roots? The people will decide...
Saturday, 25 January 2014
Denbigh High Street: Use it or lose it!
So goes the old saying, "You can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink". Too true. This can easily be translated to the town where I live. Denbigh is like a template for so many other towns in our country today. A former market town whose ancient market is now the site of a supermarket. A supermarket sanctioned by the local council which has impacted far more on the town centre than they originally promised. A high street in extremis wondering how much longer it will be able to exist without life support. A quality selection of charity shops run by community volunteers. A quite staggering array of fast food shops. Two out of every five Denbigh residents work in the public sector. That is not only the highest proportion in the county of Denbighshire but is also one of the highest proportions of any town in the UK today.
News of the closure of Tiggs is therefore hardly surprising. I feel desperately sorry for the people who tried to make a go of it. We used the shop regularly and found the quality of the goods excellent and the staff fantastic. So why has it failed? What did they do wrong? I don't think they did anything wrong. Just like the plethora of pubs which also predominate our town, this shop was dependent on people walking through the door. That eventuality was ultimately dependent on local people using the high street. Going through the door of a pub or shop is one thing. Spending your money there is another. It is the latter which sustains local business.
If this piece sounds uncomfortable, I'm glad. If our high street is to have a sustainable future, people are going to have to be taken out of their comfort zones. I don't think Morrison's enjoys quite the same market share since the emergence of LIDL as a viable player. LIDL has just filled the long standing hole which emerged following the demise of Kwik Save. As many locals have said recently, Morrison's (like the other big supermarkets) is actually expensive. I am therefore amazed to see so many full trolleys whenever I have to go there given that we keep hearing about a cost of living crisis. Do a like for like shop in LIDL and see what I mean. The arrival of Morrison's killed our local green grocer although I'm pleased to see that the flower shop has since started to offer a few lines. The bakery which took over Alwyn Thomas' has also gone by the way side but again, not through anything they've done wrong. Once again, they were done for by Morrison's. I appreciate that the Co-Op is a factor in all of this but with respect, when was the last time you saw someone at the check out with a full trolley of shopping?
The shops on the high street can't just expect people to use the high street if they aren't good enough. But they are good enough and have been good enough. So why are the current 8,062 Denbigh residents turning their back on their own town? This does not include the 10,000 living in the surrounding villages who all need to use the town regularly. Is it because we don't have enough shops? Is it because we don't have enough well known national chains (only Boots and Holland and Barrett as I write)? Is it because parking a car is an issue? Is it because there's not enough choice to sit down and eat?
I think parking is an issue. Like it or not, we are firmly in the age of the motor car. People have become more sedentary. They aren't in the habit walking in the way they were years ago. Denbigh has an obvious problem. It is only flat for a very short distance on the top of town and there's really not a lot we can do about that. But consider this: It has had a borough charter since 1290 so why are the hills an issue now? Obviously, in those days people walked through lack of alternative unless they were sufficiently affluent to own a horse. So is the current factory ward car park sufficiently big, sufficiently well sign posted and sufficiently close to the main high street? I would argue that it is close enough for anyone. The current parking tariff of 10p for 30 minutes or 50p for longer needs to be abolished. There should be no barrier to people using the high street. The cost of employing someone to collect the current revenues is probably not cost effective anyway. If the existing tariff was removed, I wonder if the current car park would be big enough but that is a matter of conjecture. But one thing is for sure - it is not well sign posted. That is not an issue for locals because they all know where it is. It is an issue for visitors though and a friend of ours recently complained about this when he came to visit. That said, I suspect the majority of current shoppers on Denbigh high street are on foot anyway since so many people live within easy walking distance. Also, I always see plenty of available car parking spaces whenever I walk through that way.
When I was little, people could park along the middle of the road on Denbigh high street and for the life of me, I don't understand why that was ever dispensed with. They could have changed the system to emulate the current arrangement in Bala where people can pull in on either side of the road. They could also have done the really bold thing and just pedestrianised the high street. I feel the latter could save the high street. It would not be beyond the wit of man to go back to the idea of a by-pass starting at Lenten Pool which goes to the Industrial Estate.
Many people I speak to cite the internet as being the biggest threat to our high street and all the latest figures do point to a continuing growth in internet transactions. In a way, you can see why. People can often get a better price on line without the need to use expensive petrol or diesel to go and collect their goods. That is true but internet transactions do lack in other areas. For one thing, you don't get a face to face contact. For all the power of the internet, nothing will ever be as vital and powerful as face to face human contact. It is human contact which drives community. Cheaper prices do not drive community as enticing as they might be. In the world before the internet, the majority of shop keepers made a living. Mostly, they did not make a fortune because that was not their motive for keeping a shop. Their motive was to make a living and become a vital cog in their local community. If high streets like the one in Denbigh are to thrive again, two things need to happen. The local people must once more appreciate the fact that the high street has more to offer than corporate supermarkets or the internet. For their part, the local shop keepers must realise that their realistic potential is to make a living rather than a killing. To do this, they need to supply the existing needs of the population they serve.
I referred earlier to the so called cost of living crisis. It is a fashionable expression which bemuses me. It refers to the fact that many people have less disposable income now than when the recession first took hold in 2008. I also appreciate that there are a minority whose income is now less than their outgoings and know from my own experience how difficult that can be. Seldom has the abilty to budget been more important than in today's competitive world. But for those who can and do budget, there are arguably more bargains than ever for the shrewd shopper. If we really are in the depths of a cost of living crisis, I can only say that I've never seen so many cars on the road which suggests that the "crisis" may not be as bad as we are led to believe. In my world, the car has long since become a luxury item reserved for essential journeys. If more people were prepared to compromise on how often they choose to use their car, I suspect their disposable incomes would improve.
The pubs in Denbigh were once the epicentre of it's vibrant community. Compared to the crowds I used to see at the weekend, the pubs have seen their trade diminish in recent times. There are two possible explanations. The first suggests that people are drinking less and yet all the evidence points to the opposite in the over 25 age groups. The second explanation is that drinkers are drinking at home first in a bid to save themselves the expense of a night out. Fair enough. The problem is that the pubs are fighting a battle on a far from level playing field. Until such time as the supermarkets are reined in with their offers of cheap booze, the days of the pubs seem sadly numbered. When the playing field is once more level, the pubs will once more thrive and by inference, so too will the community. When we've had too much in the pub, there is a willing crowd of witnesses (community) on hand to remind us after the event. At home, no such crowd is on hand and for many, that can be the start of the slippery slope.
Towns in other parts of the UK have resorted to all sorts of novel ploys in order to regenerate their town centres. There are some who have initiated a town centre loyalty scheme complete with their own currency and reward points but I have my reservations about that approach. If the community is strong in the first place, we should not need to incentivise them to use their local shops. Incentivising customers is the domain of the big supermarkets and has been instrumental in their success. Think about it. If their prices were fair in the first place, why would they be offering us rewards to shop there. Unfortunately, many use them for the convenience of being able to park and get just about everything they needed under one roof. That is understandable but what is not understandable is the premium in price they are prepared to pay for the privilege.
One of the biggest attractions to me about shopping locally is the human contact. I am able to find out about local events. I am able to find out about real local issues which affect all of us. I can satisfy myself that I am supporting a local person in a local job usually in the private sector. If more people took this approach, there would be more local shops employing greater numbers of local people. They would also be offering a wider range of goods.
News of a proposed merger between Denbighshire and Conwy councils will undoubtedly result in numerous redundancies. Instead of seeing this as a threat though, we should be seizing the opportunity. This means that there will be a greater number looking to fill the existing jobs. Competition is never a bad thing because it serves to improve the existing offerings of local businesses. If the town once more begins to recognise the unique advantages of having a vibrant high street - and the vibrant community which goes with that - more shops will emerge to fill the existing gaps. This would lead to even more job opportunities. There are items which I can't get in Denbigh currently but that does not have to remain the case. That can change if demand increases. Having a burgeoning independent sector is the mark of a successful modern town. Such towns bring in the tourists because they become shining lights amid the gloom of general high street demise. At present, just 1 in 7 Denbigh residents is employed in retail. That figure is obviously made up of both full and part time positions. But that figure could be significantly increased if more local people got behind the town. I've often heard local people bemoaning the trend in which our young people end up leaving the area due to a lack of employment opportunies but it doesn't have to be like that. If we do what we've always done, we'll get what we've always got.
I started this piece reflecting on the sad demise of Tiggs at the former Woolworths site. That premises is one of the biggest retail floor spaces in the town and we need to ask why Woolworths came to the end of the road. Although still missed by many, Woolworths was simply not supported by enough people. This was true of the people of Denbigh and just about every other town with a Woolworths branch in the UK. The point I make is that Woolworths was a big national player. We would be better served by an independent shop filling that gap preferably being run by a local person with a sound working knowledge of the local community. The location of Tiggs is also noteworthy because in many ways it is the start point of the Denbigh retail community if you are walking in to town from the Lenten Pool area (rumours of hoards of people walking in to town from Morrison's are yet to be corroborated!). All the more reason for the next occupier to be local and preferably supplying those goods currently lacking in the town. I've seen people suggesting national names like B&M or Home Bargains. Their product offering would certainly fit the bill but they are neither local nor independent. That said, either would be an improvement on yet another empty retail unit.
Any plans to breathe life back in to the high street in Denbigh ought to involve the one trump card the town has left to play. Although it has recently benefited from a new £600,000 visitor centre, Denbigh Castle is surely instrumental in bringing in visitors. I wonder if CADW could be doing more to promote this jewel in our crown? There is huge potential here and I don't think it has even been dented yet.
So what will become of Tiggs? In a way, I can apply the same question to the entire high street. Although it's an old cliche, if we don't use it, we'll lose it. Before we know it, the council will give planning consent to another of the big four supermarkets and the writing will be on the wall. In a piece last year, I cited three buildings which I consider vital to the rebirth of our once thriving high street. Nothing since then has altered my view. The cinema on Love Lane, the Church Institute and the Crown Hotel form a key triangle within which any regeneration will take place. I don't know if we'll ever have a cinema on Love Lane again (although the films at Theater Twm o'r Nant are excellent) but I see no reason why the other two buildings can't once more play an integral part in the life of our town. On a final note, I'm really pleased to see a conversation starting to emerge on social networks like this. This is a good first step because it shows that enough people actually care.
News of the closure of Tiggs is therefore hardly surprising. I feel desperately sorry for the people who tried to make a go of it. We used the shop regularly and found the quality of the goods excellent and the staff fantastic. So why has it failed? What did they do wrong? I don't think they did anything wrong. Just like the plethora of pubs which also predominate our town, this shop was dependent on people walking through the door. That eventuality was ultimately dependent on local people using the high street. Going through the door of a pub or shop is one thing. Spending your money there is another. It is the latter which sustains local business.
If this piece sounds uncomfortable, I'm glad. If our high street is to have a sustainable future, people are going to have to be taken out of their comfort zones. I don't think Morrison's enjoys quite the same market share since the emergence of LIDL as a viable player. LIDL has just filled the long standing hole which emerged following the demise of Kwik Save. As many locals have said recently, Morrison's (like the other big supermarkets) is actually expensive. I am therefore amazed to see so many full trolleys whenever I have to go there given that we keep hearing about a cost of living crisis. Do a like for like shop in LIDL and see what I mean. The arrival of Morrison's killed our local green grocer although I'm pleased to see that the flower shop has since started to offer a few lines. The bakery which took over Alwyn Thomas' has also gone by the way side but again, not through anything they've done wrong. Once again, they were done for by Morrison's. I appreciate that the Co-Op is a factor in all of this but with respect, when was the last time you saw someone at the check out with a full trolley of shopping?
The shops on the high street can't just expect people to use the high street if they aren't good enough. But they are good enough and have been good enough. So why are the current 8,062 Denbigh residents turning their back on their own town? This does not include the 10,000 living in the surrounding villages who all need to use the town regularly. Is it because we don't have enough shops? Is it because we don't have enough well known national chains (only Boots and Holland and Barrett as I write)? Is it because parking a car is an issue? Is it because there's not enough choice to sit down and eat?
I think parking is an issue. Like it or not, we are firmly in the age of the motor car. People have become more sedentary. They aren't in the habit walking in the way they were years ago. Denbigh has an obvious problem. It is only flat for a very short distance on the top of town and there's really not a lot we can do about that. But consider this: It has had a borough charter since 1290 so why are the hills an issue now? Obviously, in those days people walked through lack of alternative unless they were sufficiently affluent to own a horse. So is the current factory ward car park sufficiently big, sufficiently well sign posted and sufficiently close to the main high street? I would argue that it is close enough for anyone. The current parking tariff of 10p for 30 minutes or 50p for longer needs to be abolished. There should be no barrier to people using the high street. The cost of employing someone to collect the current revenues is probably not cost effective anyway. If the existing tariff was removed, I wonder if the current car park would be big enough but that is a matter of conjecture. But one thing is for sure - it is not well sign posted. That is not an issue for locals because they all know where it is. It is an issue for visitors though and a friend of ours recently complained about this when he came to visit. That said, I suspect the majority of current shoppers on Denbigh high street are on foot anyway since so many people live within easy walking distance. Also, I always see plenty of available car parking spaces whenever I walk through that way.
When I was little, people could park along the middle of the road on Denbigh high street and for the life of me, I don't understand why that was ever dispensed with. They could have changed the system to emulate the current arrangement in Bala where people can pull in on either side of the road. They could also have done the really bold thing and just pedestrianised the high street. I feel the latter could save the high street. It would not be beyond the wit of man to go back to the idea of a by-pass starting at Lenten Pool which goes to the Industrial Estate.
Many people I speak to cite the internet as being the biggest threat to our high street and all the latest figures do point to a continuing growth in internet transactions. In a way, you can see why. People can often get a better price on line without the need to use expensive petrol or diesel to go and collect their goods. That is true but internet transactions do lack in other areas. For one thing, you don't get a face to face contact. For all the power of the internet, nothing will ever be as vital and powerful as face to face human contact. It is human contact which drives community. Cheaper prices do not drive community as enticing as they might be. In the world before the internet, the majority of shop keepers made a living. Mostly, they did not make a fortune because that was not their motive for keeping a shop. Their motive was to make a living and become a vital cog in their local community. If high streets like the one in Denbigh are to thrive again, two things need to happen. The local people must once more appreciate the fact that the high street has more to offer than corporate supermarkets or the internet. For their part, the local shop keepers must realise that their realistic potential is to make a living rather than a killing. To do this, they need to supply the existing needs of the population they serve.
I referred earlier to the so called cost of living crisis. It is a fashionable expression which bemuses me. It refers to the fact that many people have less disposable income now than when the recession first took hold in 2008. I also appreciate that there are a minority whose income is now less than their outgoings and know from my own experience how difficult that can be. Seldom has the abilty to budget been more important than in today's competitive world. But for those who can and do budget, there are arguably more bargains than ever for the shrewd shopper. If we really are in the depths of a cost of living crisis, I can only say that I've never seen so many cars on the road which suggests that the "crisis" may not be as bad as we are led to believe. In my world, the car has long since become a luxury item reserved for essential journeys. If more people were prepared to compromise on how often they choose to use their car, I suspect their disposable incomes would improve.
The pubs in Denbigh were once the epicentre of it's vibrant community. Compared to the crowds I used to see at the weekend, the pubs have seen their trade diminish in recent times. There are two possible explanations. The first suggests that people are drinking less and yet all the evidence points to the opposite in the over 25 age groups. The second explanation is that drinkers are drinking at home first in a bid to save themselves the expense of a night out. Fair enough. The problem is that the pubs are fighting a battle on a far from level playing field. Until such time as the supermarkets are reined in with their offers of cheap booze, the days of the pubs seem sadly numbered. When the playing field is once more level, the pubs will once more thrive and by inference, so too will the community. When we've had too much in the pub, there is a willing crowd of witnesses (community) on hand to remind us after the event. At home, no such crowd is on hand and for many, that can be the start of the slippery slope.
Towns in other parts of the UK have resorted to all sorts of novel ploys in order to regenerate their town centres. There are some who have initiated a town centre loyalty scheme complete with their own currency and reward points but I have my reservations about that approach. If the community is strong in the first place, we should not need to incentivise them to use their local shops. Incentivising customers is the domain of the big supermarkets and has been instrumental in their success. Think about it. If their prices were fair in the first place, why would they be offering us rewards to shop there. Unfortunately, many use them for the convenience of being able to park and get just about everything they needed under one roof. That is understandable but what is not understandable is the premium in price they are prepared to pay for the privilege.
One of the biggest attractions to me about shopping locally is the human contact. I am able to find out about local events. I am able to find out about real local issues which affect all of us. I can satisfy myself that I am supporting a local person in a local job usually in the private sector. If more people took this approach, there would be more local shops employing greater numbers of local people. They would also be offering a wider range of goods.
News of a proposed merger between Denbighshire and Conwy councils will undoubtedly result in numerous redundancies. Instead of seeing this as a threat though, we should be seizing the opportunity. This means that there will be a greater number looking to fill the existing jobs. Competition is never a bad thing because it serves to improve the existing offerings of local businesses. If the town once more begins to recognise the unique advantages of having a vibrant high street - and the vibrant community which goes with that - more shops will emerge to fill the existing gaps. This would lead to even more job opportunities. There are items which I can't get in Denbigh currently but that does not have to remain the case. That can change if demand increases. Having a burgeoning independent sector is the mark of a successful modern town. Such towns bring in the tourists because they become shining lights amid the gloom of general high street demise. At present, just 1 in 7 Denbigh residents is employed in retail. That figure is obviously made up of both full and part time positions. But that figure could be significantly increased if more local people got behind the town. I've often heard local people bemoaning the trend in which our young people end up leaving the area due to a lack of employment opportunies but it doesn't have to be like that. If we do what we've always done, we'll get what we've always got.
I started this piece reflecting on the sad demise of Tiggs at the former Woolworths site. That premises is one of the biggest retail floor spaces in the town and we need to ask why Woolworths came to the end of the road. Although still missed by many, Woolworths was simply not supported by enough people. This was true of the people of Denbigh and just about every other town with a Woolworths branch in the UK. The point I make is that Woolworths was a big national player. We would be better served by an independent shop filling that gap preferably being run by a local person with a sound working knowledge of the local community. The location of Tiggs is also noteworthy because in many ways it is the start point of the Denbigh retail community if you are walking in to town from the Lenten Pool area (rumours of hoards of people walking in to town from Morrison's are yet to be corroborated!). All the more reason for the next occupier to be local and preferably supplying those goods currently lacking in the town. I've seen people suggesting national names like B&M or Home Bargains. Their product offering would certainly fit the bill but they are neither local nor independent. That said, either would be an improvement on yet another empty retail unit.
Any plans to breathe life back in to the high street in Denbigh ought to involve the one trump card the town has left to play. Although it has recently benefited from a new £600,000 visitor centre, Denbigh Castle is surely instrumental in bringing in visitors. I wonder if CADW could be doing more to promote this jewel in our crown? There is huge potential here and I don't think it has even been dented yet.
So what will become of Tiggs? In a way, I can apply the same question to the entire high street. Although it's an old cliche, if we don't use it, we'll lose it. Before we know it, the council will give planning consent to another of the big four supermarkets and the writing will be on the wall. In a piece last year, I cited three buildings which I consider vital to the rebirth of our once thriving high street. Nothing since then has altered my view. The cinema on Love Lane, the Church Institute and the Crown Hotel form a key triangle within which any regeneration will take place. I don't know if we'll ever have a cinema on Love Lane again (although the films at Theater Twm o'r Nant are excellent) but I see no reason why the other two buildings can't once more play an integral part in the life of our town. On a final note, I'm really pleased to see a conversation starting to emerge on social networks like this. This is a good first step because it shows that enough people actually care.
Friday, 3 January 2014
Max Gerson: Born too soon?
The 250 million obese people in 1980 have now ballooned to 1 billion obese people. By any measure, that is an extraordinary judgement on the world we live in. We have seldom had so many people starving to death wondering if they'll ever get another meal and yet we've never had so many people literally gorging themselves to death. That is quite an indictment on our race. Humanity remains as elusive as ever.
We can derive several conclusions from these revelations. One concerns the evolutionary propensity of a human being. Humans seldom stop eating at the point when they have had enough. That is because these feelings are controlled by hormones over which we have precious little control. Ghrelin instructs us to carry on eating thus overruling the satiety centres in the brain. Leptin has the opposite effect but is over-ruled by the greedy ghrelin.
I had a friend whose dog perfectly illustrated this. The dog once ate an entire bag of dog food on the simple premise that is was there. He was very ill afterwards but went on to repeat this feat several times. No matter how ill he made himself feel, his instinct was to eat whatever was on offer until nothing was available. In many ways, that dog was not dissimilar to most humans.
Most of us eat more from habit than from a need to achieve satiety. Thus, millions of us are eating far more than we need all of the time. These are inescapable facts. Rarely, stories are encountered of humans on the other extreme of this picture. One such story came to my attention this morning. Just after the latest obesity figures had been announced, I heard the story of an Australian couple in their 60s who had just run one marathon every day for the past 366 days. They did so to promote a positive message about being responsible for your own health. Well, they've certainly done that because underpinning this extraordinary feat was a diet which would make most of us run a mile (if you'll pardon the irony).
Janette Murray-Wakelin and her partner are both vegans who only eat uncooked fruit and vegetables. By eating no meat, fish or dairy produce, they have put themselves in to an ever dwindling minority. Their endurance in completing their 366 marathons (not the erstwhile chocolate bars I hasten to add), was supported by a daily regime of fruit and vegetable smoothies and fruit salads. I can only say that the prospect of completing one marathon leaves me feeling weak so I am in awe of them both.
Their regime is not exactly new though. Max Gerson was a German born physician who died in 1959. He had pioneered the Gerson Therapy which still ranks as one of the most reviled regimes outside of mainstream medicine. His regime espouses hourly juices of organic, vegetarian origin. The regime allows the consumption of fruit and vegetables but precludes all fish, meat and dairy produce. A few years ago, I went to London to meet a lady called Beata Bishop. She had been diagnosed with malignant melanoma in the late 1970s and had eschewed the solutions of mainstream medicine for the largely unknown Gerson Therapy. She is still with us and continues to promote the benefits of a meat-free diet rich in fruit and vegetables. I would add that not everybody with cancer has beaten it using the Gerson Therapy. But then, that is not my point.
My point is that the incidence of obesity and the poor health which comes with it would be much lower if more people sought to moderate the amount they ate and, more pertinently, what they ate. We must remember that food manufacturing as we now know it wasn't around before the Industrial Revolution. So what did people eat before that? Well, it certainly wasn't ready meals and meat was something more reserved for celebration days as evidenced by the word carnival. The carnival was the day when people broke their fast and ate meat again. Just imagine that now. Plenty, myself included, forego alcohol in the new year, but not so many would be so eager to forego meat would they?
The counter argument to this states that people had shorter lives before the Industrial Revolution and indeed they did. There were no antibiotics. Surgery was more of a threat than a promise and a whole host of other medical advancements had not yet been thought of. Oh, and there were no cars then. This probably allowed them to live as long as they did because to get anywhere, the majority just had to walk. If that were the case today, the rates of obesity would once more plummet. There is good recent proof to back this up.
Amid the endless comment following the death of Margaret Thatcher, it is 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 curious state of North Korea continues in its current rather bizarre format. That said, she did indeed play her part along with Reagan and the Berlin Wall really did come down to the surprise of many in my generation.
This event was to have unforeseen consequences for an island in the Caribbean. Cuba had famously remained a communist state but had now lost the long support of the Soviet Union. Life was to become very hard indeed 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. 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. To all intents and purposes, the Cubans had just adhered to sixteen years of something remarkably similar to the Gerson Therapy.
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?
The haves and the have-nots have always been with us and the works of Dickens are particularly good at portraying them. While I'm quite sure that monetary divisions will continue to feature in our lives, I just can't find the moral argument to defend the fact that millions of children starve while grown men get paid more money than they could feasibly spend for kicking a football. What has become of us? Furthermore, nobody appears to be doing anything about this. Writing this will do nothing to redress this imbalance but it will at least make me feel a bit better.
It was Nietzsche who first predicted the advent of nihilism and his words have been fulfilled to the letter. When I attend my church, it is with a heavy heart that I see the steady progress of its demise. Doubtless in a generation or two, it will become a house, a museum or a community centre and the concept of faith a distant memory. The new God of money and materialism seems to have devotees by the million.
The headline of our local newspaper last week warned "use it or lose it" in reference to community pubs. I was struck immediately by the common thread which the pub and the church share. They have both been places of great importance in the community because they were meeting places for the people. However, they have not been replaced by a new form of meeting place but rather virtual meeting places. Can social networking sites really replace the function served by these two former pillars of our communities? Their proponents would doubtless point to the Arab Spring in which a vast swathe of North Africa was gripped by the need for social change after centuries of oppression. Perhaps this argument carries weight but it is instructive to remember that these countries have thriving churches and although alcohol is forbidden, their elders meet regularly in cafes to discuss their problems. Hence, in spite of the populist view that such countries need to adopt democracy and catch up with the developed world, I am increasingly of the view that the converse could hardly be more true. In such countries, the model of the family predominates society while our model continues to crumble and fragment like a piece of sandstone.
We in the UK have just enjoyed four decades of uninterrupted growth and standards of living which our forebears would not have even imagined. Yet still we want more. Is there no limit to the extent of our greed. I look around me and never have to look for my next meal. I am never cold and never in need of clothing. I can't even comprehend the lives of most of the people with whom I share this strange planet. Our grandfathers gave their lives in the two world wars so that the next generation would not have to face such horrors. However, I feel that their sacrifice was in vain because if they could see us now, I don't think they'd do it all again - and I for one wouldn't blame them if they didn't.
It is interesting to consider the political ideologies which polarised the world as a consequence of the World Wars. On the one hand Communism espoused equality for all while Capitalism espoused opportunity for all. With only North Korea and Cuba left as the only true Communist nations, it would be fair to conclude that this ideology was fundamentally flawed. However, compared to its Capitalist nemesis, Communism has been a roaring success. Capitalism has been a disaster for millions of us as evidenced by recent developments in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and Italy to name but a few. All these countries have been living off overdrafts the magnitude of which they couldn't hope to repay.
Could it be that a third way exists which has not yet been espoused? For the sake of us all, I sincerely hope so because I'm not sure I like what I see around me. Perhaps Dickens was just trying to tell us through the mouthpiece of Mr. Micawber and friends to give us all an insight into what the future could be. Never did he do this to better effect than with the three ghosts who visited Scrooge upon that fateful Christmas Eve. Perhaps like Scrooge we will all wake up and turn over a new leaf. Perhaps we will all start to remember those around us instead of looking after number one. Perhaps a football club winning a trophy might not be so important after all and perhaps we will feel personal responsibility for the plight of our fellow man. Perhaps we won't need to be guided by Public School educated politicians on the payroll of greedy Antipodeans desperate to extract our money from us. Maybe we can all learn to just count our blessings and be truly grateful for what we have rather than what we have not.
But back to Max Gerson. I do not suggest as he did that his Gerson Therapy was a credible cure for cancer. That would be fanciful. His fundamental argument though was sound. We are eating too much food. Too much of what we are eating is the wrong stuff and we are taking far too little exercise. Much as the medical establishment despises Max Gerson, they would do well to consider the basic message of this regime. If they did, the current challenges to world health would be radically cut. Taxing unhealthy food is not the answer. Educating people about the right food will be infinitely more effective. We have a big problem. We have continued to promote a food retail structure which actively promotes most of the very foods which we should be seeking to restrict in our diets. The food retail sector is now massive providing employment for millions. Solving that problem is the key to addressing our existing challenges to health.
We can derive several conclusions from these revelations. One concerns the evolutionary propensity of a human being. Humans seldom stop eating at the point when they have had enough. That is because these feelings are controlled by hormones over which we have precious little control. Ghrelin instructs us to carry on eating thus overruling the satiety centres in the brain. Leptin has the opposite effect but is over-ruled by the greedy ghrelin.
I had a friend whose dog perfectly illustrated this. The dog once ate an entire bag of dog food on the simple premise that is was there. He was very ill afterwards but went on to repeat this feat several times. No matter how ill he made himself feel, his instinct was to eat whatever was on offer until nothing was available. In many ways, that dog was not dissimilar to most humans.
Most of us eat more from habit than from a need to achieve satiety. Thus, millions of us are eating far more than we need all of the time. These are inescapable facts. Rarely, stories are encountered of humans on the other extreme of this picture. One such story came to my attention this morning. Just after the latest obesity figures had been announced, I heard the story of an Australian couple in their 60s who had just run one marathon every day for the past 366 days. They did so to promote a positive message about being responsible for your own health. Well, they've certainly done that because underpinning this extraordinary feat was a diet which would make most of us run a mile (if you'll pardon the irony).
Janette Murray-Wakelin and her partner are both vegans who only eat uncooked fruit and vegetables. By eating no meat, fish or dairy produce, they have put themselves in to an ever dwindling minority. Their endurance in completing their 366 marathons (not the erstwhile chocolate bars I hasten to add), was supported by a daily regime of fruit and vegetable smoothies and fruit salads. I can only say that the prospect of completing one marathon leaves me feeling weak so I am in awe of them both.
Their regime is not exactly new though. Max Gerson was a German born physician who died in 1959. He had pioneered the Gerson Therapy which still ranks as one of the most reviled regimes outside of mainstream medicine. His regime espouses hourly juices of organic, vegetarian origin. The regime allows the consumption of fruit and vegetables but precludes all fish, meat and dairy produce. A few years ago, I went to London to meet a lady called Beata Bishop. She had been diagnosed with malignant melanoma in the late 1970s and had eschewed the solutions of mainstream medicine for the largely unknown Gerson Therapy. She is still with us and continues to promote the benefits of a meat-free diet rich in fruit and vegetables. I would add that not everybody with cancer has beaten it using the Gerson Therapy. But then, that is not my point.
My point is that the incidence of obesity and the poor health which comes with it would be much lower if more people sought to moderate the amount they ate and, more pertinently, what they ate. We must remember that food manufacturing as we now know it wasn't around before the Industrial Revolution. So what did people eat before that? Well, it certainly wasn't ready meals and meat was something more reserved for celebration days as evidenced by the word carnival. The carnival was the day when people broke their fast and ate meat again. Just imagine that now. Plenty, myself included, forego alcohol in the new year, but not so many would be so eager to forego meat would they?
The counter argument to this states that people had shorter lives before the Industrial Revolution and indeed they did. There were no antibiotics. Surgery was more of a threat than a promise and a whole host of other medical advancements had not yet been thought of. Oh, and there were no cars then. This probably allowed them to live as long as they did because to get anywhere, the majority just had to walk. If that were the case today, the rates of obesity would once more plummet. There is good recent proof to back this up.
Amid the endless comment following the death of Margaret Thatcher, it is 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 curious state of North Korea continues in its current rather bizarre format. That said, she did indeed play her part along with Reagan and the Berlin Wall really did come down to the surprise of many in my generation.
This event was to have unforeseen consequences for an island in the Caribbean. Cuba had famously remained a communist state but had now lost the long support of the Soviet Union. Life was to become very hard indeed 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. 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. To all intents and purposes, the Cubans had just adhered to sixteen years of something remarkably similar to the Gerson Therapy.
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?
The haves and the have-nots have always been with us and the works of Dickens are particularly good at portraying them. While I'm quite sure that monetary divisions will continue to feature in our lives, I just can't find the moral argument to defend the fact that millions of children starve while grown men get paid more money than they could feasibly spend for kicking a football. What has become of us? Furthermore, nobody appears to be doing anything about this. Writing this will do nothing to redress this imbalance but it will at least make me feel a bit better.
It was Nietzsche who first predicted the advent of nihilism and his words have been fulfilled to the letter. When I attend my church, it is with a heavy heart that I see the steady progress of its demise. Doubtless in a generation or two, it will become a house, a museum or a community centre and the concept of faith a distant memory. The new God of money and materialism seems to have devotees by the million.
The headline of our local newspaper last week warned "use it or lose it" in reference to community pubs. I was struck immediately by the common thread which the pub and the church share. They have both been places of great importance in the community because they were meeting places for the people. However, they have not been replaced by a new form of meeting place but rather virtual meeting places. Can social networking sites really replace the function served by these two former pillars of our communities? Their proponents would doubtless point to the Arab Spring in which a vast swathe of North Africa was gripped by the need for social change after centuries of oppression. Perhaps this argument carries weight but it is instructive to remember that these countries have thriving churches and although alcohol is forbidden, their elders meet regularly in cafes to discuss their problems. Hence, in spite of the populist view that such countries need to adopt democracy and catch up with the developed world, I am increasingly of the view that the converse could hardly be more true. In such countries, the model of the family predominates society while our model continues to crumble and fragment like a piece of sandstone.
We in the UK have just enjoyed four decades of uninterrupted growth and standards of living which our forebears would not have even imagined. Yet still we want more. Is there no limit to the extent of our greed. I look around me and never have to look for my next meal. I am never cold and never in need of clothing. I can't even comprehend the lives of most of the people with whom I share this strange planet. Our grandfathers gave their lives in the two world wars so that the next generation would not have to face such horrors. However, I feel that their sacrifice was in vain because if they could see us now, I don't think they'd do it all again - and I for one wouldn't blame them if they didn't.
It is interesting to consider the political ideologies which polarised the world as a consequence of the World Wars. On the one hand Communism espoused equality for all while Capitalism espoused opportunity for all. With only North Korea and Cuba left as the only true Communist nations, it would be fair to conclude that this ideology was fundamentally flawed. However, compared to its Capitalist nemesis, Communism has been a roaring success. Capitalism has been a disaster for millions of us as evidenced by recent developments in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and Italy to name but a few. All these countries have been living off overdrafts the magnitude of which they couldn't hope to repay.
Could it be that a third way exists which has not yet been espoused? For the sake of us all, I sincerely hope so because I'm not sure I like what I see around me. Perhaps Dickens was just trying to tell us through the mouthpiece of Mr. Micawber and friends to give us all an insight into what the future could be. Never did he do this to better effect than with the three ghosts who visited Scrooge upon that fateful Christmas Eve. Perhaps like Scrooge we will all wake up and turn over a new leaf. Perhaps we will all start to remember those around us instead of looking after number one. Perhaps a football club winning a trophy might not be so important after all and perhaps we will feel personal responsibility for the plight of our fellow man. Perhaps we won't need to be guided by Public School educated politicians on the payroll of greedy Antipodeans desperate to extract our money from us. Maybe we can all learn to just count our blessings and be truly grateful for what we have rather than what we have not.
But back to Max Gerson. I do not suggest as he did that his Gerson Therapy was a credible cure for cancer. That would be fanciful. His fundamental argument though was sound. We are eating too much food. Too much of what we are eating is the wrong stuff and we are taking far too little exercise. Much as the medical establishment despises Max Gerson, they would do well to consider the basic message of this regime. If they did, the current challenges to world health would be radically cut. Taxing unhealthy food is not the answer. Educating people about the right food will be infinitely more effective. We have a big problem. We have continued to promote a food retail structure which actively promotes most of the very foods which we should be seeking to restrict in our diets. The food retail sector is now massive providing employment for millions. Solving that problem is the key to addressing our existing challenges to health.
Friday, 20 December 2013
Anjem Choudary: Welcome to the United Kingdom
The conviction yesterday of the two men responsible for the murder of Lee Rigby in Woolwich was bound to arouse strong emotions on either side of the debate. In truth though, a quick glimpse at media coverage this morning shows the debate to be reassuringly on the side of the innocent, defenceless victim. Reassuringly but not exclusively on the side of Lee Rigby.
As I always do, I tuned in to the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning and listened to John Humphreys interviewing Anjem Choudray. Mr Choudray is an avowed proponent of an Islamic State in the UK. As a co-founder of the now banned organisation al-Muhajiroun, Choudray has long called for Sharia law in the UK. For fear of boring anyone further with the minutiae of detail, the central point is this; Choudray is in a minority. He is an Islmaic extremist by his own admission and this morning refused to condemn the daylight murder of Lee Rigby in Woolwich. Irrespective of his agenda, his refusal to condemn such a vile, inhuman act confirms beyond doubt the extent to which he is resistant to our culture. That is his prerogative. To my mind, the BBC was quite right to let him express his views however odious. The expression of his views will only serve to strengthen the conviction of the general population regarding the UK they want to live in and the culture they want to live in.
Extremism is nothing new and a quick glance through history tells us that while they've always been around, they just don't last. Oswald Mosely was the facist who led the brown shirts in the 1930s. Despite considerable support, the British Union of Facists failed to gain a single seat in Parliament. That was during the great depression. It is frequently at such times that extremists prosper. In recent times, we have witnessed the rise of the British National Party. They too have garnered considerable sympathy in certain areas although they remain reassuringly distant from a first seat in Parliament. It is a sign of the real leanings of UK society that the most recent maiden breakthrough to our Parliament has been made by the Green Party through the efforts of Caroline Lucas in Brighton.
This is not a coincidence. Choudray and people like him can rant all they like but they miss several crucial points. First of all, nobody is even remotely interested in his views so he can take up all the media time he wants but it will not sway people in the slightest because of their sheer indifference. Furthermore, he speaks of Islam against non-Islam. His argument here is based on religion. In this he is badly misguided because the UK has now become a largely secular country. Thus, his aim of creating an Islamic state in the UK is just about as impossible a task as you could feasibly make up. I wish more people today did have a faith but I also accept that for the vast majority, it is not something of any great importance in their lives. Here is the point. In the UK, people have a choice and it is incumbent on the rest of us to respect the choices they make - provided they don't seek to ram that choice down our throats. The latter is rightly unacceptable in UK society.
Choudray argues against British involvement in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan. He would surprised if he knew how many British people agree with him. By common consent, the motives of Blair in taking us in to Iraq were dubious. Many would choose stronger words than dubious. Whether or not we are right to have engaged in the affairs of Iraq and Afghanistan is ultimately a matter for the history books. Either way though, we are slowly realising that ours is not to police the world. It never was and it still isn't. The gradual shrinking of our military capability is the inevitable consequence of our realising how our place in the world has changed.
So what do we do about people like Choudary? The knee jerk reaction would be to advocate the death penalty or life imprisonment. These or similar reactions would only play right in to his hands. As vile as he is to the vast majority, we must not fall in to the trap of descending to his level. If we espouse democracy and free speech, we must bite the bullet and afford him his say. It does not follow that we must listen or agree with him.
As we enter the countdown to the Christian festival of Christmas, let's remind ourselves what it's all about. It is a time of hope and a cause for great optimism and happiness. Even if you don't have a faith, it is a time for family and friendship. This Christmas, spare a thought for the less fortunate people in your lives and remember the family of Lee Rigby who will face a Christmas they didn't ask for and didn't deserve. Choudray can achieve one very important function. He can strengthen the resolve in all of us to remain firm and remember the code by which we all live. As the United Kingdom, we must stay United and cherish our democracy warts and all.
As I always do, I tuned in to the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning and listened to John Humphreys interviewing Anjem Choudray. Mr Choudray is an avowed proponent of an Islamic State in the UK. As a co-founder of the now banned organisation al-Muhajiroun, Choudray has long called for Sharia law in the UK. For fear of boring anyone further with the minutiae of detail, the central point is this; Choudray is in a minority. He is an Islmaic extremist by his own admission and this morning refused to condemn the daylight murder of Lee Rigby in Woolwich. Irrespective of his agenda, his refusal to condemn such a vile, inhuman act confirms beyond doubt the extent to which he is resistant to our culture. That is his prerogative. To my mind, the BBC was quite right to let him express his views however odious. The expression of his views will only serve to strengthen the conviction of the general population regarding the UK they want to live in and the culture they want to live in.
Extremism is nothing new and a quick glance through history tells us that while they've always been around, they just don't last. Oswald Mosely was the facist who led the brown shirts in the 1930s. Despite considerable support, the British Union of Facists failed to gain a single seat in Parliament. That was during the great depression. It is frequently at such times that extremists prosper. In recent times, we have witnessed the rise of the British National Party. They too have garnered considerable sympathy in certain areas although they remain reassuringly distant from a first seat in Parliament. It is a sign of the real leanings of UK society that the most recent maiden breakthrough to our Parliament has been made by the Green Party through the efforts of Caroline Lucas in Brighton.
This is not a coincidence. Choudray and people like him can rant all they like but they miss several crucial points. First of all, nobody is even remotely interested in his views so he can take up all the media time he wants but it will not sway people in the slightest because of their sheer indifference. Furthermore, he speaks of Islam against non-Islam. His argument here is based on religion. In this he is badly misguided because the UK has now become a largely secular country. Thus, his aim of creating an Islamic state in the UK is just about as impossible a task as you could feasibly make up. I wish more people today did have a faith but I also accept that for the vast majority, it is not something of any great importance in their lives. Here is the point. In the UK, people have a choice and it is incumbent on the rest of us to respect the choices they make - provided they don't seek to ram that choice down our throats. The latter is rightly unacceptable in UK society.
Choudray argues against British involvement in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan. He would surprised if he knew how many British people agree with him. By common consent, the motives of Blair in taking us in to Iraq were dubious. Many would choose stronger words than dubious. Whether or not we are right to have engaged in the affairs of Iraq and Afghanistan is ultimately a matter for the history books. Either way though, we are slowly realising that ours is not to police the world. It never was and it still isn't. The gradual shrinking of our military capability is the inevitable consequence of our realising how our place in the world has changed.
So what do we do about people like Choudary? The knee jerk reaction would be to advocate the death penalty or life imprisonment. These or similar reactions would only play right in to his hands. As vile as he is to the vast majority, we must not fall in to the trap of descending to his level. If we espouse democracy and free speech, we must bite the bullet and afford him his say. It does not follow that we must listen or agree with him.
As we enter the countdown to the Christian festival of Christmas, let's remind ourselves what it's all about. It is a time of hope and a cause for great optimism and happiness. Even if you don't have a faith, it is a time for family and friendship. This Christmas, spare a thought for the less fortunate people in your lives and remember the family of Lee Rigby who will face a Christmas they didn't ask for and didn't deserve. Choudray can achieve one very important function. He can strengthen the resolve in all of us to remain firm and remember the code by which we all live. As the United Kingdom, we must stay United and cherish our democracy warts and all.
Thursday, 12 December 2013
Food Crime in the UK
The intention to establish a UK food crime agency is an interesting development. The realisation that we have been fobbed off with horse meat in our ready meals has created the mother of knee jerk reactions. In a country which can lay claim to being the ancestral home of the knee jerk reaction, this is quite a story.
The horse meat had been identified in a processed meal the nutritional content of which is probably not too different to the packaging whence it came. I wonder how many of us could honestly hold our hand up to being able to differentiate with any reliability between horse and beef?
A few years ago, I was holidaying with my wife and we decided to sail over to Sardinia for a few weeks. I was rather surprised when I first encountered the meat counter in the butcher's shop because it was more difficult to find meat which wasn't horse. Hence, as stereotypical carnivores, we gorged on horse for a fortnight and jolly nice it was too if a trifle sweet in comparison to beef. In a lasagne though, I would defy anyone to spot the difference.
The late, great Sir Clement Freud who had the most extraordinary of lives, opened a restaurant after the second world war which prospered for a number of years. In the immediate aftermath of the war, things were tight to put it mildly and people made do with what they had. On one of the first nights, one of the diners complimented Clement on the meat and asked what it was. In his trademark laconic style, Clement informed him that the meat was horse. Because everybody always assumed that Clement was joking, the diners roared with laughter and continued with their meal. It was horse.
The saddest part about revelations which show that Tesco has thrown over 30,000 tonnes of food away in the last quarter is that I wasn't even remotely surprised. Certainly I was appalled but I wasn't surprised. The trouble is that this has been allowed to evolve over many years as Tesco has continued its obscene domination of the UK retail sector.
In these posts, I have long advocated the advantages and strengths of localism and this news just adds more weight to my argument. To understand these revelations better though, it is instructive to analyse the details.
We are told that one of the biggest items thrown away is bags of salad. There are two sides to this. Not everybody shops at Tesco so they will always be faced with buying challenges when stocking up their fresh produce offerings. That said, Tesco have Clubcard. Not so much to reward your custom as you may mistakenly believe, but rather to track your buying patterns and seek to supply them accordingly for the maximum profit. Therefore, they can't even predict with accuracy how much stock they need on their shelves even when armed with the buyinf patterns of their customers. They either have a sub-standard buying department or an over ambitious growth forecast.
Aside from the obvious point that we have increasingly become a nation of salad dodgers, the other possibility here is simply that people have seen through the Tesco vision and returned to the riches of localism to be found on their own high streets. Recent market research data would appear to confirm this view.
The Tesco disclosure also asserts that its customers also continue to waste large amounts of the food they purchase. The latter is well known and should be highlighted as a national disgrace. It is immoral that we complain about austerity while throwing so much food away when people in other parts of the world really are starving to death daily. While Tesco are quite right to point to household waste, I would remind them that the latter is made possible by companies such as themselves using every marketing tool in the book to squeeze every last penny out of its Clubcard clutching customers. Just this morning, their Commercial Director of Group Food asserts that Tesco is seeking to reduce the average £700 per annum currently being thrown away by their customers so that they have more money in their pockets - so that they can spend it in Tesco of course! Is it just me or is the strategy of this and its equally nauseous friends at Asda, Morrison's and Sainsbury's barn door obvious. Their entire business models are based on continued expansion to fund even more stores and rest assured, they couldn't care a fig how they do it just as long as they can show a profit to their share holders. Frankly, its a bit rich for a company like Tesco to be pointing to the amount being thrown out by the British consumer. They really should seek to get their own house in order first. They can't have it both ways. They want everybody's custom and to eradicate the competition but woe betide you if you buy an extra bag of salad from them (which they promoted in the first place) which then gets thrown away.
Nationally, our waste of food is morally repugnant. It is utterly inexcusable. If there was a huge snow storm today which meant that everybody was confined to their homes for a couple of weeks, do you think many would starve? Of course, there would be some that would but the majority have freezers and cupboards stocked up to the brim. We all need to just take a step back here and take a look at the people in the world (of whom far too many) who genuinely don't know where their next meal is coming from. Shame on Tesco and shame on us. This problem belongs to all of us. It is immune from Nimbyism and we all have some soul searching to do.
Wherever possible, my family now spends its money on our local high street. This supports local jobs. The local shopkeeper knows me and know him. I don't have a Clubcard but I have a fair price and buy only the food which I need. I also know that much of the food I buy has been reared and produced locally so it hasn't travelled far. The Tesco apples being thrown away have been flown half way around the world and sprayed with sulphur dioxide to give the impression of freshness. My local grocer doesn't need to do that because my local apples are just that - local and fresh. Yesterday, we ate some rocket lettuce which will thankfully never see a plastic bag. We picked it fresh from our garden and it tasted like, well, rocket lettuce - as you would expect. As the saying goes, "you pay your money and you take your choice"....
As for horse consumption, this only came about in the first place because too many people resorted to ready meals instead of buying and cooking their own food from scratch. I am not convinced that anyone's life is so busy or so affluent that they can't do this. As millions throughout the world continue to wake up to another day wondering if another meal might occur, there is something distasteful about this whole story. I think history shows us that during the war, the people of the UK and other countries would have been fighting over the prospect of horse meat. Quite what they fought for is sadly becoming rather less obvious.
The horse meat had been identified in a processed meal the nutritional content of which is probably not too different to the packaging whence it came. I wonder how many of us could honestly hold our hand up to being able to differentiate with any reliability between horse and beef?
A few years ago, I was holidaying with my wife and we decided to sail over to Sardinia for a few weeks. I was rather surprised when I first encountered the meat counter in the butcher's shop because it was more difficult to find meat which wasn't horse. Hence, as stereotypical carnivores, we gorged on horse for a fortnight and jolly nice it was too if a trifle sweet in comparison to beef. In a lasagne though, I would defy anyone to spot the difference.
The late, great Sir Clement Freud who had the most extraordinary of lives, opened a restaurant after the second world war which prospered for a number of years. In the immediate aftermath of the war, things were tight to put it mildly and people made do with what they had. On one of the first nights, one of the diners complimented Clement on the meat and asked what it was. In his trademark laconic style, Clement informed him that the meat was horse. Because everybody always assumed that Clement was joking, the diners roared with laughter and continued with their meal. It was horse.
The saddest part about revelations which show that Tesco has thrown over 30,000 tonnes of food away in the last quarter is that I wasn't even remotely surprised. Certainly I was appalled but I wasn't surprised. The trouble is that this has been allowed to evolve over many years as Tesco has continued its obscene domination of the UK retail sector.
In these posts, I have long advocated the advantages and strengths of localism and this news just adds more weight to my argument. To understand these revelations better though, it is instructive to analyse the details.
We are told that one of the biggest items thrown away is bags of salad. There are two sides to this. Not everybody shops at Tesco so they will always be faced with buying challenges when stocking up their fresh produce offerings. That said, Tesco have Clubcard. Not so much to reward your custom as you may mistakenly believe, but rather to track your buying patterns and seek to supply them accordingly for the maximum profit. Therefore, they can't even predict with accuracy how much stock they need on their shelves even when armed with the buyinf patterns of their customers. They either have a sub-standard buying department or an over ambitious growth forecast.
Aside from the obvious point that we have increasingly become a nation of salad dodgers, the other possibility here is simply that people have seen through the Tesco vision and returned to the riches of localism to be found on their own high streets. Recent market research data would appear to confirm this view.
The Tesco disclosure also asserts that its customers also continue to waste large amounts of the food they purchase. The latter is well known and should be highlighted as a national disgrace. It is immoral that we complain about austerity while throwing so much food away when people in other parts of the world really are starving to death daily. While Tesco are quite right to point to household waste, I would remind them that the latter is made possible by companies such as themselves using every marketing tool in the book to squeeze every last penny out of its Clubcard clutching customers. Just this morning, their Commercial Director of Group Food asserts that Tesco is seeking to reduce the average £700 per annum currently being thrown away by their customers so that they have more money in their pockets - so that they can spend it in Tesco of course! Is it just me or is the strategy of this and its equally nauseous friends at Asda, Morrison's and Sainsbury's barn door obvious. Their entire business models are based on continued expansion to fund even more stores and rest assured, they couldn't care a fig how they do it just as long as they can show a profit to their share holders. Frankly, its a bit rich for a company like Tesco to be pointing to the amount being thrown out by the British consumer. They really should seek to get their own house in order first. They can't have it both ways. They want everybody's custom and to eradicate the competition but woe betide you if you buy an extra bag of salad from them (which they promoted in the first place) which then gets thrown away.
Nationally, our waste of food is morally repugnant. It is utterly inexcusable. If there was a huge snow storm today which meant that everybody was confined to their homes for a couple of weeks, do you think many would starve? Of course, there would be some that would but the majority have freezers and cupboards stocked up to the brim. We all need to just take a step back here and take a look at the people in the world (of whom far too many) who genuinely don't know where their next meal is coming from. Shame on Tesco and shame on us. This problem belongs to all of us. It is immune from Nimbyism and we all have some soul searching to do.
Wherever possible, my family now spends its money on our local high street. This supports local jobs. The local shopkeeper knows me and know him. I don't have a Clubcard but I have a fair price and buy only the food which I need. I also know that much of the food I buy has been reared and produced locally so it hasn't travelled far. The Tesco apples being thrown away have been flown half way around the world and sprayed with sulphur dioxide to give the impression of freshness. My local grocer doesn't need to do that because my local apples are just that - local and fresh. Yesterday, we ate some rocket lettuce which will thankfully never see a plastic bag. We picked it fresh from our garden and it tasted like, well, rocket lettuce - as you would expect. As the saying goes, "you pay your money and you take your choice"....
As for horse consumption, this only came about in the first place because too many people resorted to ready meals instead of buying and cooking their own food from scratch. I am not convinced that anyone's life is so busy or so affluent that they can't do this. As millions throughout the world continue to wake up to another day wondering if another meal might occur, there is something distasteful about this whole story. I think history shows us that during the war, the people of the UK and other countries would have been fighting over the prospect of horse meat. Quite what they fought for is sadly becoming rather less obvious.
Wednesday, 11 December 2013
Help for our loved ones?
A recent article suggested that people in the UK will vote for the party which promises to help their children and their elderly parents and relatives. I don't doubt the truth of this assertion but question the realism underpinning it.
Would these same people be so keen to cast their vote if they were told the true cost? I suspect not. Of course, from a purely Socialist angle, we should be looking to the State to provide for those in greatest need of help. It is true to suggest that the State has failed successive generations in education. Education of the parents and education of their children. Socially, we have become less socially cohesive as more and more of us have sought to own our homes and seek work away from our families. This has been caused by a variety of factors.
In Wales where I live, the Assembly Government strives for every child to be taught the Welsh language. When they leave school, the majority seek employment in England. If they return, their proficiency in the Welsh language has become eroded. While they have been away, their families have become divided. The parents they leave behind get older and with age comes illness. Illness demands care. Where once the parents might have been cared for by their own children, this is increasingly becoming the ideal rather than the reality. So why is it that there are no longer the jobs in places like Wales. Why is it that the Public Sector has been allowed to become so big while the private sector in Wales has become something of a novelty? There are many reasons for this. The real growth of the former was ushered in by the prudent Chancellor of Tony Blair in 1997. The reason why the private sector has become so negligible is that Wales has become too unattractive for business. With a poor transport infrastructure and more regulations than you could shake a stick at, Wales has effectively been closed for business for a couple of generations now. Take a walk down your local high street if you don't believe me. Take a look at your local farming community because the evidence is there for all to see. We gleefully welcome supermarkets with open arms knowing full well how much of their produce is imported from abroad.
So what about the care of our elderly because the headlines today have revolved around the burgeoning problem of dementia. Dementia is not new. Granted, there is much more of it but that is because people are living longer more than any other reasons. Historically, many would argue that dementia care was better in the past than it is now. Granted the medical side of care is more advanced but I wonder if the same could be claimed for the actual human care? Before it's closure in 1995, the former North Wales Hospital had become a centre for care of the elderly with dementia being a big part of it's work load. Although it had started life as a mental asylum, it had evolved to become a 1700 bed hospital with a large focus on care of the elderly. This had the additional effect of freeing up vital bed space at the local district general hospital. It is not hard to imagine what happened when it closed in 1995. The effect on elderly care in North Wales has been further exacerbated with the closure of a a succession of community hospitals. It seems that in Wales, the State has absolved itself from caring for the elderly. It certainly puts a lot less in to this are than it did 20 or 30 years ago.
The problem now is that for all their headline grabbing promises, none of the political parties have the necessary funds to supply the care of children and the elderly which people are looking for. In the same way, they no longer have the funds to allow people to retire at age 65. Maybe we've got to the point where the State has admitted that it's capacity to help us is limited in spite of the amount we pay in tax. Whoever promises us the earth in 2015 will not be able to deliver it so we would be better served seeking the answers to our problems within. An old saying goes like this, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day but teach a man to fish and you feed him for life". That is where the education comes in. It is not the sole responsibility of the State. It is far more the responsibility of the family. In China, an old saying claims that it takes an entire village to bring up a child. We are no different to China. The only difference is that for a variety of reasons we have lost touch with our families and communities. Until we re-connect with the latter, we can call for the Government to help us all we like but the onus will remain firmly with ourselves. I doubt whether this would garner any votes but at least it's a more honest approach than that being drawn up by the political elite.
Would these same people be so keen to cast their vote if they were told the true cost? I suspect not. Of course, from a purely Socialist angle, we should be looking to the State to provide for those in greatest need of help. It is true to suggest that the State has failed successive generations in education. Education of the parents and education of their children. Socially, we have become less socially cohesive as more and more of us have sought to own our homes and seek work away from our families. This has been caused by a variety of factors.
In Wales where I live, the Assembly Government strives for every child to be taught the Welsh language. When they leave school, the majority seek employment in England. If they return, their proficiency in the Welsh language has become eroded. While they have been away, their families have become divided. The parents they leave behind get older and with age comes illness. Illness demands care. Where once the parents might have been cared for by their own children, this is increasingly becoming the ideal rather than the reality. So why is it that there are no longer the jobs in places like Wales. Why is it that the Public Sector has been allowed to become so big while the private sector in Wales has become something of a novelty? There are many reasons for this. The real growth of the former was ushered in by the prudent Chancellor of Tony Blair in 1997. The reason why the private sector has become so negligible is that Wales has become too unattractive for business. With a poor transport infrastructure and more regulations than you could shake a stick at, Wales has effectively been closed for business for a couple of generations now. Take a walk down your local high street if you don't believe me. Take a look at your local farming community because the evidence is there for all to see. We gleefully welcome supermarkets with open arms knowing full well how much of their produce is imported from abroad.
So what about the care of our elderly because the headlines today have revolved around the burgeoning problem of dementia. Dementia is not new. Granted, there is much more of it but that is because people are living longer more than any other reasons. Historically, many would argue that dementia care was better in the past than it is now. Granted the medical side of care is more advanced but I wonder if the same could be claimed for the actual human care? Before it's closure in 1995, the former North Wales Hospital had become a centre for care of the elderly with dementia being a big part of it's work load. Although it had started life as a mental asylum, it had evolved to become a 1700 bed hospital with a large focus on care of the elderly. This had the additional effect of freeing up vital bed space at the local district general hospital. It is not hard to imagine what happened when it closed in 1995. The effect on elderly care in North Wales has been further exacerbated with the closure of a a succession of community hospitals. It seems that in Wales, the State has absolved itself from caring for the elderly. It certainly puts a lot less in to this are than it did 20 or 30 years ago.
The problem now is that for all their headline grabbing promises, none of the political parties have the necessary funds to supply the care of children and the elderly which people are looking for. In the same way, they no longer have the funds to allow people to retire at age 65. Maybe we've got to the point where the State has admitted that it's capacity to help us is limited in spite of the amount we pay in tax. Whoever promises us the earth in 2015 will not be able to deliver it so we would be better served seeking the answers to our problems within. An old saying goes like this, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day but teach a man to fish and you feed him for life". That is where the education comes in. It is not the sole responsibility of the State. It is far more the responsibility of the family. In China, an old saying claims that it takes an entire village to bring up a child. We are no different to China. The only difference is that for a variety of reasons we have lost touch with our families and communities. Until we re-connect with the latter, we can call for the Government to help us all we like but the onus will remain firmly with ourselves. I doubt whether this would garner any votes but at least it's a more honest approach than that being drawn up by the political elite.
Tuesday, 3 December 2013
8 Pieces for Advent
As we approach the beginning of the Christian year, I share with you the eight pieces I turn to for the festive period:-
1. Silent Night - the Simon and Garfunkel version for it's clever use of a poignant news story in the background of this most peaceful of songs. As ever their clever harmonies leave you in awe.
2. I Believe in Father Christmas - Greg Lake wrote this as a protest against the commercialisation of Christmas in 1975 but it was ironically adopted by Sainsbury's supermarket to promote a Christmas sales campaign. The music is based on a piece by Prokofiev and seems somehow to capture the festive spirit better than anu other. The underlying message in the song is timeless and alsmost Dickensian, "The Christmas we get we deserve".
3. In Dulce Jubilo - Mike Oldfield created this masterpiece and drew on the influence of a traditional Christmas Carol from the middle ages. A multi instrumentalist, Oldfield was ideally placed to demonstrate the innate beauty of this song. The tune first appeared in 1305 so proves that a good tune really does stand the test of time! Oldfield was in good company with this tune because it had previously been used by J.S Bach and Franz Liszt to name but a few.
4. Oh Come, Oh Come Emmanuel - The definitive song for Advent. This is the song which spells out the significance of Advent in the Christian calendar and reminds us in our busy lives what all the fuss is about. It's slow pace allows us to reflect while we sing.
5. Christmas - the late poet laureate John Betjeman arguably captured Christmas better than anybody with this timeless poem. This piece demonstrates the brilliance of Betjeman and keeps us hypnotised with familiar images taking us on a journey of rediscovery.
6. It's a Wonderful Life - There were recently rumours afloat that plans had emerged to make a sequel to this 1940s classic. Please don't. James Stewart plays George Bailey in a story which restores your faith in human nature. This needs to be in black and white and is compelling from start to finish. If one film epitomises what Christmas should be all about, this is most definitely it.
7. A Christmas Carol - There is little to add here. Dickens' story set in Victorian London with the immortal Ebenezer Scrooge is the ultimate story of redemption and reminds us all that a second chance is always just around the corner.
8. The Nutcracker - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky had to go back to the drawing board with this ballet. It was initially panned by the harsh Moscovite critics in 1877. Not one to be deterred, Tchaikovsky thankfully returned with it in 1890 and the magic was born. A timeless story which takes us all in to another world of fantasy. A welcome escape from everyday life which I recommend to anyone.
I have included dance, song, film, poetry and literature so there should be something for everyone.
1. Silent Night - the Simon and Garfunkel version for it's clever use of a poignant news story in the background of this most peaceful of songs. As ever their clever harmonies leave you in awe.
2. I Believe in Father Christmas - Greg Lake wrote this as a protest against the commercialisation of Christmas in 1975 but it was ironically adopted by Sainsbury's supermarket to promote a Christmas sales campaign. The music is based on a piece by Prokofiev and seems somehow to capture the festive spirit better than anu other. The underlying message in the song is timeless and alsmost Dickensian, "The Christmas we get we deserve".
3. In Dulce Jubilo - Mike Oldfield created this masterpiece and drew on the influence of a traditional Christmas Carol from the middle ages. A multi instrumentalist, Oldfield was ideally placed to demonstrate the innate beauty of this song. The tune first appeared in 1305 so proves that a good tune really does stand the test of time! Oldfield was in good company with this tune because it had previously been used by J.S Bach and Franz Liszt to name but a few.
4. Oh Come, Oh Come Emmanuel - The definitive song for Advent. This is the song which spells out the significance of Advent in the Christian calendar and reminds us in our busy lives what all the fuss is about. It's slow pace allows us to reflect while we sing.
5. Christmas - the late poet laureate John Betjeman arguably captured Christmas better than anybody with this timeless poem. This piece demonstrates the brilliance of Betjeman and keeps us hypnotised with familiar images taking us on a journey of rediscovery.
6. It's a Wonderful Life - There were recently rumours afloat that plans had emerged to make a sequel to this 1940s classic. Please don't. James Stewart plays George Bailey in a story which restores your faith in human nature. This needs to be in black and white and is compelling from start to finish. If one film epitomises what Christmas should be all about, this is most definitely it.
7. A Christmas Carol - There is little to add here. Dickens' story set in Victorian London with the immortal Ebenezer Scrooge is the ultimate story of redemption and reminds us all that a second chance is always just around the corner.
8. The Nutcracker - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky had to go back to the drawing board with this ballet. It was initially panned by the harsh Moscovite critics in 1877. Not one to be deterred, Tchaikovsky thankfully returned with it in 1890 and the magic was born. A timeless story which takes us all in to another world of fantasy. A welcome escape from everyday life which I recommend to anyone.
I have included dance, song, film, poetry and literature so there should be something for everyone.
Monday, 2 December 2013
Llangattock: The alternative to the Big Six?
As the energy debate rumbles on at Westminster with opposing parties squawking at each other in a vain attempt to cury favour with a weary electorate, a project has been announced which proves that the alleged monopoly of the Big Six is not quite as definite as we have been led to believe.
A Mid Wales community has pooled their resources to raise the £273,000 to build to micro hydro electric turbines to be housed on two local streams. The community at Llangattock and surrounding area is well aware of the benefits of green fuel having won an award last year. The community has already installed solar panels and radiator panels at the school with an air pump heat source. Amazingly, the 43 homes have thus far installed 655 energy saving devices ranging from insulation, solar panels, a biomass boiler and multi fuel stoves.
The community at Llangattock have merely done what the Scandinavians would consider the norm. What is notable is the number of communities which have done little or nothing. Government incentives help of course but people don't need Government help to achieve their dreams. If the people of Llangattock can do this, why are so many other communities not doing likewise?
Every penney invested now by Llangattock makes them a litle bit less reliant on fossil fuels and a little bit more sustainable. Whichever way we look at this, it just makes so much sense. It beggars belief then to observe the present Government ditching some of the green subsidies to try and save Joe Average £50 of his annual fuel bill. If this is the best our Government can do, we really are best off going it alone and seeking the solutions ourselves as done in Llangattock. They have done nothing space age. They have just maximised what they can do for the benefit of their entire community. The "have it all generation" has been taken literally in Llangattock because the entire community will benefit from their investment.
This story should be held up by this Government as a shining light. It should be used to illustrate what people can achieve if they work together in the common interest. It is schemes like this which will render irrelevant the profit margins of the Big Six. Yes, the latter need more competition but we all know that their sheer size makes competition a bit of a nonsense. Don't wait for the Government to advise you, seek the solutions yourselves and relish the independence.
A Mid Wales community has pooled their resources to raise the £273,000 to build to micro hydro electric turbines to be housed on two local streams. The community at Llangattock and surrounding area is well aware of the benefits of green fuel having won an award last year. The community has already installed solar panels and radiator panels at the school with an air pump heat source. Amazingly, the 43 homes have thus far installed 655 energy saving devices ranging from insulation, solar panels, a biomass boiler and multi fuel stoves.
The community at Llangattock have merely done what the Scandinavians would consider the norm. What is notable is the number of communities which have done little or nothing. Government incentives help of course but people don't need Government help to achieve their dreams. If the people of Llangattock can do this, why are so many other communities not doing likewise?
Every penney invested now by Llangattock makes them a litle bit less reliant on fossil fuels and a little bit more sustainable. Whichever way we look at this, it just makes so much sense. It beggars belief then to observe the present Government ditching some of the green subsidies to try and save Joe Average £50 of his annual fuel bill. If this is the best our Government can do, we really are best off going it alone and seeking the solutions ourselves as done in Llangattock. They have done nothing space age. They have just maximised what they can do for the benefit of their entire community. The "have it all generation" has been taken literally in Llangattock because the entire community will benefit from their investment.
This story should be held up by this Government as a shining light. It should be used to illustrate what people can achieve if they work together in the common interest. It is schemes like this which will render irrelevant the profit margins of the Big Six. Yes, the latter need more competition but we all know that their sheer size makes competition a bit of a nonsense. Don't wait for the Government to advise you, seek the solutions yourselves and relish the independence.
Wednesday, 27 November 2013
Advent: A golden opportunity?
The word advent is now an important part of the Christian calendar. Translated from the latin, advent means arrival and referes to the impending arrival of Christ. Thus did Christmas become such a major festival in our calendar. As such, this Sunday will be Advent Sunday and marks the beginning of preparations to celebrate the birth of Christ.
Christmas in the modern age has been successfully hijacked by the marketing men who strive to make it work for their sales ledgers. A report today reveals that the collective debt of UK householders now amounts to £1,430,000,000,000. That's clearly a lot of money but let's try and make that figure a bit more relevant. It means that on average, every man, woman and child in the UK owes £22,633 through a combination of credit cards, unsecured personal loans and mortgages. Yet at the same time, we keep hearing about this word austerity. Apparently, times are really hard in the UK as a series of government cutbacks continue to exert their vice-like grip.
The problem is that the current level of indebtedness is now just as big as it was in September 2008 just before the financial crash. There are therefore two possibilities. Either the government cutbacks are not working or people are continuing to borrow their way out of trouble. Clearly it's not quite as simple as that but the point is made. People are evidently continuing to make the same mistakes which led to the crash in the first place. The sub prime mortgage scandal in the US has been cited as the original cause of the crash but it's important to address the facts. Certainly the lenders were culpable in lending to people who hadn't a hope of repaying but he the people were equally culpable. In taking on committments which they knew they couldn't possibly afford, they were knowingly going down a path of no return. When one person this, the results are calamitous for that person. Whejn the entire country does this, the results are calamitous for the entire country. We know this because in 2008, one bank went under, one escaped by the skin of it's teeth and millions of people lost their jobs and incomes.
When I'm at home I now prefer the radio because the TV has just become a glorified salesman always trying to tempt you with some new product which you had previously managed without perfectly well. As the retail giants do battle to try and produce the perfect Christams advertisement, the TV programme must now take second place. I exercise the option to which David Cameron refered when he was still leader of the opposition. I turn it off because it has lost it's appeal. I'm happy with what I have and feel truly blessed when I look at those people in the world who have nothing. Literally nothing. If I look at the Philippines, Syria and a whole host of other countries, I am easily reminded of my good fortune and their tragedy.
From the fourth century, Advent was a time for fasting and reflection with even dancing and celebrations being frowned upon. You have only to look around you to see that the concept of fasting now would be unimaginable to the many. These days, people try to do without something they really like for Lent for few fast during Advent. Self denial is fast becoming a thing of the past. Our refusal to compromise and do without is creating misery and this report simply highlights that fact. Our failure to distinguish between what we want and waht we need is costing us dear.
When Pope Francis yesterday published his proposals for the future of the Catholic church, his opposition to materialism was palpable - and rightly so. Not just in the UK but all around the "civilised" world, people are becoming increasingly obsessed with material goods. The problem with materialsim is that it does not make for happiness in the true spiritual sense of the world. It's ok for a brief time but then the novelty is lost and the emptiness continues.
If our collective debt currently stands at £1,430,000,000,000, I shudder to think how much bigger it will be come January. Heaven forbid anyone allows religion to get in the way of a good spending spree, but it might just be that the time has come for faith to fight back and show people another way. The Conservative party was once the party of faith but all that changed about 20 years ago for fear such an association might cost votes. It seems to me that the need for faith in our society has never been greater. Whether that faith is Christian or not doesn't matter. What matters is that people become aware that a world exists beyond the lure of the marketing men.
One of the people interviewed for the report on debt admitted that her debt was nerve racking and made her feel ill. I can't imagine it having any other effect. The report concluded that 74% of those with debt admitted to being unhappy - no surprises there then. At the root of much of the borrowing is avarice. To look wistfully at the belongings of your neighbour is one thing but to enter debt to have the same is quite another. That said, I feel strongly that our children should be taught at home and at school the importance of budgeting and living within your means. For years now, savers in this country have been penalised and this is a national disgrace. We ought to be rewarding responsibility rather than penalising it.
So what of Advent this year. Is this to mark the arrival of yet more debt and yet more misery or could it possibly be an oportunity for us all to just step back and take stock? Advent starts on Sunday and gives us a four week period within which to remind ourselves of what really matters in our lives. It's also a great opportunity to consider all the people less fortunate than ourselves. We sadly seem to be stuck with Sunday trading but that doesn't mean we have to engage with it. I wonder what would happen if people for once turned their backs on materialism and instead turned to their fellow men? Maybe then we wouldn't see so many elderly people dying due to cold and hunger. Perhaps mental illness would become a bit more accepted. The benefits just go on and on so why not give them a try for the next four weeks? What's the worst thing that can happen? It can't put us in to any more debt but might just show us the way out.
Christmas in the modern age has been successfully hijacked by the marketing men who strive to make it work for their sales ledgers. A report today reveals that the collective debt of UK householders now amounts to £1,430,000,000,000. That's clearly a lot of money but let's try and make that figure a bit more relevant. It means that on average, every man, woman and child in the UK owes £22,633 through a combination of credit cards, unsecured personal loans and mortgages. Yet at the same time, we keep hearing about this word austerity. Apparently, times are really hard in the UK as a series of government cutbacks continue to exert their vice-like grip.
The problem is that the current level of indebtedness is now just as big as it was in September 2008 just before the financial crash. There are therefore two possibilities. Either the government cutbacks are not working or people are continuing to borrow their way out of trouble. Clearly it's not quite as simple as that but the point is made. People are evidently continuing to make the same mistakes which led to the crash in the first place. The sub prime mortgage scandal in the US has been cited as the original cause of the crash but it's important to address the facts. Certainly the lenders were culpable in lending to people who hadn't a hope of repaying but he the people were equally culpable. In taking on committments which they knew they couldn't possibly afford, they were knowingly going down a path of no return. When one person this, the results are calamitous for that person. Whejn the entire country does this, the results are calamitous for the entire country. We know this because in 2008, one bank went under, one escaped by the skin of it's teeth and millions of people lost their jobs and incomes.
When I'm at home I now prefer the radio because the TV has just become a glorified salesman always trying to tempt you with some new product which you had previously managed without perfectly well. As the retail giants do battle to try and produce the perfect Christams advertisement, the TV programme must now take second place. I exercise the option to which David Cameron refered when he was still leader of the opposition. I turn it off because it has lost it's appeal. I'm happy with what I have and feel truly blessed when I look at those people in the world who have nothing. Literally nothing. If I look at the Philippines, Syria and a whole host of other countries, I am easily reminded of my good fortune and their tragedy.
From the fourth century, Advent was a time for fasting and reflection with even dancing and celebrations being frowned upon. You have only to look around you to see that the concept of fasting now would be unimaginable to the many. These days, people try to do without something they really like for Lent for few fast during Advent. Self denial is fast becoming a thing of the past. Our refusal to compromise and do without is creating misery and this report simply highlights that fact. Our failure to distinguish between what we want and waht we need is costing us dear.
When Pope Francis yesterday published his proposals for the future of the Catholic church, his opposition to materialism was palpable - and rightly so. Not just in the UK but all around the "civilised" world, people are becoming increasingly obsessed with material goods. The problem with materialsim is that it does not make for happiness in the true spiritual sense of the world. It's ok for a brief time but then the novelty is lost and the emptiness continues.
If our collective debt currently stands at £1,430,000,000,000, I shudder to think how much bigger it will be come January. Heaven forbid anyone allows religion to get in the way of a good spending spree, but it might just be that the time has come for faith to fight back and show people another way. The Conservative party was once the party of faith but all that changed about 20 years ago for fear such an association might cost votes. It seems to me that the need for faith in our society has never been greater. Whether that faith is Christian or not doesn't matter. What matters is that people become aware that a world exists beyond the lure of the marketing men.
One of the people interviewed for the report on debt admitted that her debt was nerve racking and made her feel ill. I can't imagine it having any other effect. The report concluded that 74% of those with debt admitted to being unhappy - no surprises there then. At the root of much of the borrowing is avarice. To look wistfully at the belongings of your neighbour is one thing but to enter debt to have the same is quite another. That said, I feel strongly that our children should be taught at home and at school the importance of budgeting and living within your means. For years now, savers in this country have been penalised and this is a national disgrace. We ought to be rewarding responsibility rather than penalising it.
So what of Advent this year. Is this to mark the arrival of yet more debt and yet more misery or could it possibly be an oportunity for us all to just step back and take stock? Advent starts on Sunday and gives us a four week period within which to remind ourselves of what really matters in our lives. It's also a great opportunity to consider all the people less fortunate than ourselves. We sadly seem to be stuck with Sunday trading but that doesn't mean we have to engage with it. I wonder what would happen if people for once turned their backs on materialism and instead turned to their fellow men? Maybe then we wouldn't see so many elderly people dying due to cold and hunger. Perhaps mental illness would become a bit more accepted. The benefits just go on and on so why not give them a try for the next four weeks? What's the worst thing that can happen? It can't put us in to any more debt but might just show us the way out.
Monday, 25 November 2013
The Peter Principle in 2013
The Peter Principle is one of my favourite truisms. At the same time though, I wish it didn't come true so often. Briefly, the Peter Principle states that in an organisation where promotion is based on achievment, success and merit, each employee will eventually arrive at a position beyond the level of their capability.
Reading this piece, I defy you not to think of at least a dozen people to whom this applies. The recent headlines concerning the Co-Op bank provide us with as good an example as we could reasonably wish for. In promoting a Methodist preacher with no formal banking experience, it is all too easy to jump on the bandwagon and pillory Paul Flowers. The fact is that he only did what most of us might have done if offered such a high salary. He proved he is human. He took the money. I have genuine sympathy for the church whose name has been dragged through the mud with him but not for the politicians who turned a blind eye to his evident inexperience for such an important role.
The Methodists I know don't take drugs or engage in the sort of activities Flowers is alleged to have engaged in. Instead they are decent folk who look out for their fellow man and just try to do the right thing. Whenever a leading figure in the church is exposed like this, it undoes all the hard work of their colleagues who tirelessly get on with the real challenges with little or no recognition on a daily basis. That said, I hope his church shows him the support he will now badly need and I hope he is once more reminded of what really matters in life. He of all people shouldn't need too much reminding. Perhaps his promotion within his church was an example of the Peter Principle as well and the entire organisation needs a period of introspection to learn from the error.
After the crash of 2008, we were nevertheless assured that no bank would be badly led again. This makes it all the more surprising to understand. It wasn't even as though he had a banking background. I note that the Labour party has already begun the process of distancing themselves from the man whose low interest loans they have all too gladly accepted. The relationship of political parties with donors seriously needs to be reviewed because the current system absolutely stinks.
UKIP have the patronage of Paul Sykes. Labour enjoy the patronage of the Unions and the Co-Op bank (even though the latter can barely afford to buy a pint of milk such is the extent of their current mess). The Tories enjoy the patronage of various city billionaires and even the ailing Liberals have friends in high places. There has to be a better way of doing this because it is fast becoming a case of whoever has the most money gets the keys to number 10. This in no way reflects true public opinion and does not reflect well on the current political system.
I read a number of years ago that bureaucracy is rather like an enormous cess pit in which the really big bits float to the top. Sadly, that comparison is depressingly true and we badly need to rid ourselves of that smell. The greatest irony in the Paul Flowers story is that at a time when faith has so much to offer by way of a meaningful alternative to the vices of modern life, it has shown itself to be no better than the rest. Church congregations are dwindling up and down the land yet the church has so much to offer.
As Cameron seeks to distance himself from his green credentials and as Farage seeks to spend his way to an EU referendum, as Milliband seeks to distance himself from all knowledge of Paul Flowers and as Nick Clegg seeks to change with the wind, we can all rest assured that the Peter Principle is as true today as it as ever been. Just as the Co-Op put Paul Flowers at the head of it's massive banking operation, the Unions put Milliband at the head of the Labour party. It seems that such decisions don't concern the likes of you and I.
Reading this piece, I defy you not to think of at least a dozen people to whom this applies. The recent headlines concerning the Co-Op bank provide us with as good an example as we could reasonably wish for. In promoting a Methodist preacher with no formal banking experience, it is all too easy to jump on the bandwagon and pillory Paul Flowers. The fact is that he only did what most of us might have done if offered such a high salary. He proved he is human. He took the money. I have genuine sympathy for the church whose name has been dragged through the mud with him but not for the politicians who turned a blind eye to his evident inexperience for such an important role.
The Methodists I know don't take drugs or engage in the sort of activities Flowers is alleged to have engaged in. Instead they are decent folk who look out for their fellow man and just try to do the right thing. Whenever a leading figure in the church is exposed like this, it undoes all the hard work of their colleagues who tirelessly get on with the real challenges with little or no recognition on a daily basis. That said, I hope his church shows him the support he will now badly need and I hope he is once more reminded of what really matters in life. He of all people shouldn't need too much reminding. Perhaps his promotion within his church was an example of the Peter Principle as well and the entire organisation needs a period of introspection to learn from the error.
After the crash of 2008, we were nevertheless assured that no bank would be badly led again. This makes it all the more surprising to understand. It wasn't even as though he had a banking background. I note that the Labour party has already begun the process of distancing themselves from the man whose low interest loans they have all too gladly accepted. The relationship of political parties with donors seriously needs to be reviewed because the current system absolutely stinks.
UKIP have the patronage of Paul Sykes. Labour enjoy the patronage of the Unions and the Co-Op bank (even though the latter can barely afford to buy a pint of milk such is the extent of their current mess). The Tories enjoy the patronage of various city billionaires and even the ailing Liberals have friends in high places. There has to be a better way of doing this because it is fast becoming a case of whoever has the most money gets the keys to number 10. This in no way reflects true public opinion and does not reflect well on the current political system.
I read a number of years ago that bureaucracy is rather like an enormous cess pit in which the really big bits float to the top. Sadly, that comparison is depressingly true and we badly need to rid ourselves of that smell. The greatest irony in the Paul Flowers story is that at a time when faith has so much to offer by way of a meaningful alternative to the vices of modern life, it has shown itself to be no better than the rest. Church congregations are dwindling up and down the land yet the church has so much to offer.
As Cameron seeks to distance himself from his green credentials and as Farage seeks to spend his way to an EU referendum, as Milliband seeks to distance himself from all knowledge of Paul Flowers and as Nick Clegg seeks to change with the wind, we can all rest assured that the Peter Principle is as true today as it as ever been. Just as the Co-Op put Paul Flowers at the head of it's massive banking operation, the Unions put Milliband at the head of the Labour party. It seems that such decisions don't concern the likes of you and I.
Just not cricket!
In many ways, the modern era of cricket can be traced back to the final Gentlemen versus Players match in 1962. With a history stretching back to 1806, this annual event in the sporting calendar showcased the best amateurs against the best professionals. As it drew to it's close, it had become akin to one of those Victorian Follies with it's raison d'etre long having been superfluous. For all that though, things were different then. Although there were amateurs and professionals with their respective class distinctions, standards on the field of play were nevertheless sacrosanct.
As aggressive and as great a bowler as Fred Trueman was, his 307 test match wickets were acquired by letting his cricket do the talking - although he was never a short of an opinion. Trueman was a direct straight talking Yorkshireman but not a rude one. Certainly he did plenty of muttering under his breath when things weren't going his way, but he would never lower himself to directing vulgar language to a member of the opposition. He was bigger than that. In those days, cricket was bigger than that. What has happened since has coincided with the advent of the professional era. But it is no coincidence.
Jonathan Agnew was quick to highlight the stupidity of holding two Ashes series back to back and he has been vindicated in his view. After just one match, standards have already slipped to new lows. Behaviour from both sides has been appalling and there is a good reason why I refer to this. Young players look to the national team for guidance on how to play the game. They might not be able to bat like Bell or bowl like Anderson but they will be able to emulate their behaviour. That is now a source of great regret. By fining the Australian Captain a paltry 20% of his match fee, the ICC has given carte blanche to other players to behave accordingly. As the Captain of his national side, Clarke should have had his entire match fee withdrawn and been suspended for one match. Failure to treat this problem properly now will leave cricket no different to football if indeed we are not already there.
While coaching under sixteens a few years ago, I was genuinely appalled by some of the behaviour I saw. I later reflected on where this might have come from. Clearly, parents always have a huge influence on their children but so too does the national side on our TV sets. I started to think back regarding the first unsavoury incidents I had seen when watching the national team.
Although a little before my interest in cricket, the England Ashes tour of 1974 to the Antipodes produced a surreal moment. Rather like those natural phenomona when two oceans meet, an incident occured which was possibly one of the very last to include a survivor of the old era with a pin up boy of the new. England had been suffering a bruising at the hands of the new found Australian pace bowling duo of Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson. They weren't there to make friends and exchange pleasantries. They saw their role as being one of utter unbridled aggression and they did not disappoint. As news emerges that Jonathan Trott is to return home from the present tour (albeit for personal reasons), it is timely to consider that our current batting crisis was nothing compared to that which confronted us nearly 40 years ago. In a desperate bid to inject some steel in to the English top order, the rotund Colin Cowdrey was recalled and joined up with the tour which featured several players who had not yet been born when he made his first century at Lords. In his book, Cowdrey recalls walking out to the crease and politely introducing himself to Jeff Thomson, "Hello, I'm Colin Cowdrey, pleased to meet you". He was not being obseqious because this was just Colin behaving in the correct manner. He was greeted with a vile torrent of abuse and later professed that many of the words used had not hitherto been familiar to him. Colin was one of the finest players to represent his country and his manners were never less than exemplary. Oh for such an example for our youngsters today.
I then recalled the unpleasant exchange between Ian Botham and Alan Whitehead during the home Ashes series in 1985. When you have the talent of Botham, it does you no good to resort to such acts of petulance and I'm sure he can't look back on that incident with any pride. We than witnessed the unfortunate spectacle of the England captain Mike Gatting becoming embroiled in a finger wagging altercation with the Pakistan Umpire Shakoor Rana. Gatting was a redoubtable character but not a rude one so it was surprising to see himself get flustered in this fashion. Granted, the umpiring up to that point had been shocking, but Gatting should not have allowed himself as captain to sink to the same level.
But if Botham and Gatting were both culpable in their behaviours, Chris Broad took bad sportsmanship and ill manners to a new level. It culminated with him demolishing his stumps when he disagreed with an umpiring decision - not a very dignified approach.
Interestingly, the team who dominated world cricket during my younger years rarely got involved with this sort of behaviour. The West Indies for a long time were so far ahead of all the other teams, they had no need to behave badly because they could rest assured of a win in the majority of cases. Famously, Michael Holding did kick down the stumps in anger at another umpiring decision which had not gone his way on tour in New Zealand. This though was the exception rather than the rule. Viv Richards had a hot temper but did not put it on show on the field of play. Many a dressing room was the worse for wear after his three pound bat had ricocheted off a few walls and windows.
The current Ashes series is deluded if it thinks it can be compared with the Bodyline series of 75 years ago. Bodyline emerged as a tactic purely because one batsman had become the dominant difference between the two sides. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Bodyline, it did not feature foul language or discourtesy. Douglas Jardine instructed Larwood where he wanted him to bowl and Larwood did so. There was no need for finger pointing or swearing then and nor is there now.
I was intrigued to learn that Michael Clarke had been docked 20% of his match fee simply because a pitch microphone had picked up what he had said. There should be no need for microphones in the first place. A strong umpire would snuff out any silliness in an instant and the current crop should be given the power to do so. Cricket used to be like Rugby in that arguing with the referee was just not the done thing. To get back to that, the ICC needs to send out a strong message sooner rather than later before cricket becomes a bore. It is not good for anyone to see players behaving in this fashion and even the players must feel pretty silly to say the least. While the porfessional era is now here to stay, it doesn't follow that we have to compromise on standards. To do so is a cop out to the marketing men and shows a massive lack of leadership both on and off the field of play. If England are to get back in to this series, I candidly suggest that they seek to do so with the bat and the ball. It's time to shut up and get on with the cricket.
As aggressive and as great a bowler as Fred Trueman was, his 307 test match wickets were acquired by letting his cricket do the talking - although he was never a short of an opinion. Trueman was a direct straight talking Yorkshireman but not a rude one. Certainly he did plenty of muttering under his breath when things weren't going his way, but he would never lower himself to directing vulgar language to a member of the opposition. He was bigger than that. In those days, cricket was bigger than that. What has happened since has coincided with the advent of the professional era. But it is no coincidence.
Jonathan Agnew was quick to highlight the stupidity of holding two Ashes series back to back and he has been vindicated in his view. After just one match, standards have already slipped to new lows. Behaviour from both sides has been appalling and there is a good reason why I refer to this. Young players look to the national team for guidance on how to play the game. They might not be able to bat like Bell or bowl like Anderson but they will be able to emulate their behaviour. That is now a source of great regret. By fining the Australian Captain a paltry 20% of his match fee, the ICC has given carte blanche to other players to behave accordingly. As the Captain of his national side, Clarke should have had his entire match fee withdrawn and been suspended for one match. Failure to treat this problem properly now will leave cricket no different to football if indeed we are not already there.
While coaching under sixteens a few years ago, I was genuinely appalled by some of the behaviour I saw. I later reflected on where this might have come from. Clearly, parents always have a huge influence on their children but so too does the national side on our TV sets. I started to think back regarding the first unsavoury incidents I had seen when watching the national team.
Although a little before my interest in cricket, the England Ashes tour of 1974 to the Antipodes produced a surreal moment. Rather like those natural phenomona when two oceans meet, an incident occured which was possibly one of the very last to include a survivor of the old era with a pin up boy of the new. England had been suffering a bruising at the hands of the new found Australian pace bowling duo of Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson. They weren't there to make friends and exchange pleasantries. They saw their role as being one of utter unbridled aggression and they did not disappoint. As news emerges that Jonathan Trott is to return home from the present tour (albeit for personal reasons), it is timely to consider that our current batting crisis was nothing compared to that which confronted us nearly 40 years ago. In a desperate bid to inject some steel in to the English top order, the rotund Colin Cowdrey was recalled and joined up with the tour which featured several players who had not yet been born when he made his first century at Lords. In his book, Cowdrey recalls walking out to the crease and politely introducing himself to Jeff Thomson, "Hello, I'm Colin Cowdrey, pleased to meet you". He was not being obseqious because this was just Colin behaving in the correct manner. He was greeted with a vile torrent of abuse and later professed that many of the words used had not hitherto been familiar to him. Colin was one of the finest players to represent his country and his manners were never less than exemplary. Oh for such an example for our youngsters today.
I then recalled the unpleasant exchange between Ian Botham and Alan Whitehead during the home Ashes series in 1985. When you have the talent of Botham, it does you no good to resort to such acts of petulance and I'm sure he can't look back on that incident with any pride. We than witnessed the unfortunate spectacle of the England captain Mike Gatting becoming embroiled in a finger wagging altercation with the Pakistan Umpire Shakoor Rana. Gatting was a redoubtable character but not a rude one so it was surprising to see himself get flustered in this fashion. Granted, the umpiring up to that point had been shocking, but Gatting should not have allowed himself as captain to sink to the same level.
But if Botham and Gatting were both culpable in their behaviours, Chris Broad took bad sportsmanship and ill manners to a new level. It culminated with him demolishing his stumps when he disagreed with an umpiring decision - not a very dignified approach.
Interestingly, the team who dominated world cricket during my younger years rarely got involved with this sort of behaviour. The West Indies for a long time were so far ahead of all the other teams, they had no need to behave badly because they could rest assured of a win in the majority of cases. Famously, Michael Holding did kick down the stumps in anger at another umpiring decision which had not gone his way on tour in New Zealand. This though was the exception rather than the rule. Viv Richards had a hot temper but did not put it on show on the field of play. Many a dressing room was the worse for wear after his three pound bat had ricocheted off a few walls and windows.
The current Ashes series is deluded if it thinks it can be compared with the Bodyline series of 75 years ago. Bodyline emerged as a tactic purely because one batsman had become the dominant difference between the two sides. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Bodyline, it did not feature foul language or discourtesy. Douglas Jardine instructed Larwood where he wanted him to bowl and Larwood did so. There was no need for finger pointing or swearing then and nor is there now.
I was intrigued to learn that Michael Clarke had been docked 20% of his match fee simply because a pitch microphone had picked up what he had said. There should be no need for microphones in the first place. A strong umpire would snuff out any silliness in an instant and the current crop should be given the power to do so. Cricket used to be like Rugby in that arguing with the referee was just not the done thing. To get back to that, the ICC needs to send out a strong message sooner rather than later before cricket becomes a bore. It is not good for anyone to see players behaving in this fashion and even the players must feel pretty silly to say the least. While the porfessional era is now here to stay, it doesn't follow that we have to compromise on standards. To do so is a cop out to the marketing men and shows a massive lack of leadership both on and off the field of play. If England are to get back in to this series, I candidly suggest that they seek to do so with the bat and the ball. It's time to shut up and get on with the cricket.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)