Whose Tanks Should We Buy?

Our economy is staggering on - and it can't be described as anything more than staggering. Financial services are in a mess and not likely to get much better anytime soon - we still have to pay a lot of bonuses. The £ sterling has collapsed 20% in value and normally, in the past, we would have been able to rely on this to give a boost to exports and overcome balance of payments problems. This time it is not working. Our exports have not gone up and since we have to import so much our import costs are rising. And this is stoking up inflation. The Governor of the Bank of England has said that he does not expect to get the inflation figure below the 2% figure for some time. I am sure he is right. There are several reasons for our present difficulties. First, so many western economies are in straitened circumstances that they are not buying unless they have to. Second, we have so decimated our manufacturing base that now we hardly manufacture anything that people will ever want to buy. Third, some of our manufacturing costs are too high. Fourth, our technology is starting to lag behind in many fields because of a lack of investment.

Various governments have presided over the manufacturing decline, happy to let tin bashing go to SE Asia. Of course, most of the experts who allowed this to happen - indeed, in some circumstances, encouraged it - did not have the foggiest idea of what was involved. Now all parties have suddenly realised that we need to have a strong manufacturing base. But is it too late to stop our decline into oblivion? We do not re-build our manufacturing in a couple of months.

It may not be too late but if we are to recover, whatever government is in power has to support home-grown industry. This government talks but, in practice, it hastens the decline. Last year they gave a contract for re-equipping the West Coat Main Line of the railways to a Japanese group. Worth about £4 billion, that loss was a humiliation for the country that supplied railways to the world. Geoff Hoon told us - it was a simple lie - that giving the order to Japan would safeguard 12,000 jobs. The only jobs safeguarded were maintenance jobs that would exist whoever built the trains. The Japanese told us that only about 300 jobs would be created in the UK.

Now, this abysmal government is to do it again - and this time their failure is even more serious. They are about to place an order for 600 tanks with General Dynamics who will manufacture in Spain and Austria and the MOD will ignore the BAE Systems CV90 vehicle [above] which is apparently superior. BAE have spent five years developing this tank and if they lose this contract to General Dynamics, tank building in the UK will end. That will destroy thousands of jobs and make us unable in the future to equip ourselves except with hardware bought abroad. This would never, never, never be allowed to happen in the USA - nor most other countries in the west. It is an absolutely staggering decision. It seems that the only thing that will matter is that the General Dynamics tank is a bit cheaper. Ignore all the knock-on effects and the increase in our balance of payments deficit, when the situation is already desperate. Yet again, the government reveals itself as possessing incompetence as its prime asset for running the country. Surely, even at this late stage, there is someone who will stop them?

/

Rubbish. Is it better in HD?

Many moons ago now, I can remember when we got our first TV at home. It was a Bush, weighed a ton and had a 12in screen. My mum and dad bought it for the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953. Of course, it would have been wonderful to have seen that pageant in glorious colour but at that time colour TV was a long way off and we had to watch in black & white. Nevertheless, and in spite of the tiny screen, we thought it was marvellous. We only had one channel from the BBC and there was no commercial TV. But then the other channels appeared and we had 3 or 4 for many years. Then came colour. A friend who had retired now found himself glued to the new colour TV but complained that a lot of the programmes were rubbish - but they were better in colour. I have almost similar feelings today when we have dozens of channels all in glorious colour. We have wide screen plasma and projection TVs that can provide us with huge pictures in HD format - the cinema in the living room. But I don't think the programmes are better in wide screen format. They are when the programmes are good but, unfortunately, in spite of lots of channels, there is still a lot of rubbish on TV. In fact, it is so difficult to provide good quality programmes for so many channels that buckets of rubbish and lots of repeats to fill in the time are almost inevitable. But there is so much that is really dire. Acres and acres of soap operas - how can anybody watch this stuff night after night, week in and week out; the producers dreaming up every more fantastic story lines to keep the things going - and still they are rubbish. Then there are all the talent shows, celebrity dancing, skating, singing - God help is - all dire stuff. Weird documentaries for minority audiences that are specialised to the point of invisibility. Pop singers to opera - what was that all about? Good pop-singers become pub singers. The programme companies tell us that they are trying to attract a younger audience. Why? It's pensioners who watch TV. And if the programmes were not bad enough, there are the adverts for products that I will never buy; hours and hours of adverts. Programmes that were originally made by the BBC to last for 30 minutes, now last for 40 minutes because there are 10 minutes added on for the bloody adverts. And the channels line themselves up so that you cannot slip off to another channel rather than watch the adverts. All the channels put their adverts on at the same time. And it becomes clear that the whole purpose of the programmes is to fill in the gaps between adverts - and so the programmes don't matter anymore - as long as they can get high spending young people to watch the adverts. Am I a cynic? Yes!

/

How Do You Make A Loo Roll?

It's time now to discuss a real major issue. Why can't the world manage to make proper toilet paper; loo rolls that do not disintegrate and are not constructed of paper like so much silk-like gossamer that could float zephyr-like on the soft summer air. I have tried rolls of high and low price, in different colours, made by a dozen different companies and stocked in six supermarket chains, But it makes no difference, the stuff falls to pieces with a minimum of stress. Why? Do we have to go back to the smooth, rough, tough Izal medicated toilet tissue so beloved of colonels who grew up on the North West Frontier; assuming it is still available anywhere. The Carbolic Soap Co. in Bromley, Kent - surely people who would know - tells us that Izal tissues and rolls are no longer available. And if they cannot be obtained in Bromley, where can they be obtained?

It seems that manufacturers of soft, fluffy, delicate toilet tissues have lost the plot and forgotten what is the exact purpose of toilet rolls. Or is it a Health & Safety issue. Most things that are not matters of the human rights of thugs, crooks and asylum seekers come down to Health & Safety issues in the end. Such issues have lead to the cancellation of the Gloucestershire cheese rolling festival at Brockworth because, say the organisers, too many people have been coming to watch. This event has gone on for over 300 years without much more than a few cuts and bruises among the contestants but now the risks are too great. Plans are underway for an event in 2011 but it may have to be moved somewhere with less risk of crowds of people and less constrained by the tortured thinking of local bureaucrats and the H&S executive; the upper slopes of The Andes is a distinct possibility.

If you do find any robust, effective and soft toilet rolls, do let me know!

/

Incest

Yesterday and today have been cold, grey and rather depressing winter days. The atmosphere has not been improved by the announcement of yet another spectacular failure of the social services; not one but several social service departments spread across two counties. Yet again, we have a case that has been and will continue to be shrouded in secrecy. We must not know the names of anyone involved in order to protect the identities of the victims - that I understand - but the perpetrator has, apparently, shown no remorse and continues to make demands of the victims from his prison cell. No doubt, all will be revealed, disastrously, at a later date.

This story is set in South Yorkshire and in Lincolnshire and involves a man, now 57, who over a period of 35 years raped his own daughters over 1,000 times, producing 18 pregnancies and seven living children. For many years it was suspected that the pregnant women had been involved in acts of incest but, in spite of the activities of 100 care workers, 28 agencies, numerous conferences, countless complaints - even one from the man's own son, 13years ago - the abuse has gone on for so many years. The man is no more than a drink sodden, violent bully who beat his children all the time - and his wife as well, until she left in 1992. He has collected buckets of money in benefits and moved home 67 times to make keeping track of him that much harder. It seems that the social care workers were afraid of him and avoided taking positive action - preferring to have a quiet word. It only needed one of that vast army of people to take action and the abuse could have been stopped. Concerns were expressed by ambulance workers, by school teachers, by relatives - in addition to the son - but, unbelievably nothing was done and the abuse continued. The judge at the trial in 2008 wondered what the social services had been doing for the previous 20 years. The report on the disaster was published yesterday and an army of officials lined up to say that they were sorry. The man is now in jail serving 25 life sentences which was set at the original trial - was it held in camera? - with a recommendation that he should serve a minimum of 19 years but which, for some obscure reason was reduced to 14 years on appeal. Why? Why? Why? If ever there were a man who should be locked away with no possibility of ever being released, this was he, so why was the sentence reduced? Had I been an appeal court judge, I would have increased the sentence to ensure there was not the slightest chance of this man ever being let out. Forget any rubbish about rehabilitation and release, after 35 years of calculated violence and abuse he should be made to pay a severe penalty for his actions. This was no single act, no unusual aberration, no forgivable mistake. In times past, we hung children for sheep stealing and nowadays, we treat a man like this with kid gloves. I am a consistent opponent of a death penalty for any crime but something like this must give us cause to wonder if there are some crimes that warrant the severest of sentences.

What makes this story so appalling is not just that it is probably the worst case of incest ever brought before a British court but that so many people did nothing in spite of an avalanche of data. Not every social work could have been expected to know and understand what was happening but, surely, some of the most senior people involved - many paid very considerable wages for their expertise - should have realised that there were serious matters that needed to be fully investigated. But apparently not! No one has been disciplined; no one has been held responsible; no action is being taken beyond the usual issuing of statements that are no more than bureaucratic nonsense of platitudinous waffle. "Lessons have been learned." This will do until the next disaster. Soon they will tell us something about "sending the right messages."

I suppose the next thing we have to look forward to is a knee jerk reaction from the government and possibly some grandiose scheme to test every family in the land for potential incestuous relationships - ignoring the fact that evidence in this case came charging at the social services like a high speed train - and still no one noticed.

/

Bolton Sink In Sunderland

Well, things are getting back to normal. Bolton Wanderers, having engineered two Premier League wins on the trot got back to their losing ways by going 4 - 0 down at Sunderland on Tuesday. All sorts of excuses were wheeled out but if they are managing to lose by 4 goals to a team like Sunderland their days in the Premier League could be numbered. Why is this? They have players who can play well - as they did against West Ham - but yet they can get this sort of result. They do not have any quality players in the Wayne Rooney class but neither have lots of other teams. I feel some of Bolton's problems are down to insecurity - a lack of self-belief - but I also think it some of it is down to lack of commitment. Every player has to want to be the best above all else. But if they can get £40,000- per week and afford big house, cars and parties, it may be that they do not want more. It is certainly true of some of the highest paid players. There are even players in the Premier League being paid £40,000 per week who hardly ever play at all. Playing for your country is less important than getting paid more money to live a play-boy lifestyle. I am not saying Bolton suffer this more than other clubs; I am sure that they do not. But, if I were a manager, i would not tolerate players paid vast salaries who spend far too much time in clubs and performing as serial shaggers and drunks. My contacts with bodybuilders tell me that the ones who make it to the top in bodybuilding competitions are almost always those who live a very frugal life training hard, resting and eating the right foods all the year round. The ones who miss workouts, cheat on their diets and like to party never make it. I have seen many men with almost perfect genetics who have achieved nothing because they lacked commitment. And bodybuilders do what they do without pay. Few bodybuilders - worldwide - make a living directly from bodybuilding, so it is not the lure of wealth that drives them on; it is the need to have a freaky physique and then to be the best that you can be. More footballers should have similar attitudes and then they just might be better players.

/

Insuring A Dog

No matter how bad the economy gets and no matter how desperate the national situation looks, nothing will stop the government coming up with crackpot ideas. Today it's dog insurance and dog chips - the electronic ones implanted in the neck for identification. This really is an idea dreamt up in one of the darker reaches of the asylum.

What they are concerned about, or so they tell us, is the numbers of dangerous and often illegal dogs being kept as fashion accessories by young thugs, dogs bred for fighting and dogs - very dangerous ones - kept for protection. How will dog insurance help? OK, so a dog is insured so that compensation can be paid to anyone attacked or just bitten by a dog but the people who own and breed the most dangerous dogs will not bother with insurance. Who will decide the premiums and on what basis. We are told that insurance will cost £600 per year - which seems like plenty. Will they get no claims bonuses for good behaviour? And who will police this? Will the Police/RSPCA be going out on dog patrols to find the uninsured dogs? Already in this H&S obsessed world, dogs are treated as though they are as dangerous as Indonesian dragons, when the majority of them are quite harmless. Will all dogs have to be insured? Does it include vicious, people scaring Yorkshire Terriers and Chihuahuas?

This is just another piece of legislation by a government that does not understand that they are in office primarily to manage not just to give the impression that they are doing something. Just as with their data bases and identity cards they cannot distinguish between collecting buckets of data and having data bases that monitor the people and things that matter. The place to hide a book is in a library; but it is much easier to find a book hidden in a library with 500 books than one with 25,000. The government's policy will put the books in the library but will make every specific book impossible to find. We have had many incidents over recent years of sex crimes committed by men who were on the record as sex offenders - in some cases as repeat sex offenders - yet monitoring and control was totally inadequate. The system for keeping track was there yet its working was hopelessly inadequate. And so the government goes for more legislation to keep track of more and more people in the hope that the blunderbuss approach will either produce some results or will deter the real criminals.

In practice the dog insurance scheme will not work, it will cost a fortune and in fifty years time, it will be abandoned - consigned to the grave in which it should have been buried on day one.

What will be their daft idea for Wednesday?

/

Bolton Win Away!!

Bolton Wanderers scored two goals today at West Ham who could only manage one. This was Bolton's first away goal in 740 minutes of playing football - even more impressive than their record at Home. Coupled with their recent win at the Reebock Stadium they now have 29 points and are up to 13th in the table. This game also marked the first away game won in the Premier League by the manager Owen Coyle - either at Burnley or at Bolton. But it's all dour stuff. Their next game is at Sunderland. Now if they could win that - but I am drifting into the realms of fancy.

/

Paying Taxes

Another piece of news this week that has stirred up a hornet's nest is the revelation that Lord Ashcroft, the Tory peer and primary provider of Tory Party funds has been a non-dom [for tax purposes] for the last 10 years. This in spite of the fact that he told William Hague that he would become a full UK resident when Hague put his name forward for membership of the House of Lords. Now, it seems that he renegotiated that position with officials of the House of Lords but he did not tell William Hague. So, he became what is described as a long-term UK resident and, thus, did not need to pay any tax on his earnings outside the UK. His base is, allegedly, Belize and he does not pay any tax there either. It is claimed that the Tory leader David Cameron only found out about this in the last few weeks and William Hague found out a few months ago. Are a few weeks and a few months time spans that equal each other? Or did Hague find out and not tell Cameron. Either way, it is an extraordinary story. Yet again, one has doubts about the competence of Cameron and his team. In view of all the furore about Ashcroft - for years, not months - and who is far and away the biggest single donor to the party, if I had been David Cameron I would have made damn sure that I knew exactly the tax status of Lord Ashcroft. It is pathetic to suggest that this is only a matter for Ashcroft and HMR&C. It is also pathetic to suggest that the otter parties are just as bad. I think not. They, also, have benefactors who are non-doms but they have not deliberately hidden this as Ashcroft has done. It is not acceptable that we have a very rich men sheltering almost all of their money from UK taxation yet seeking as Ashcroft does, to establish and support a government and party that will legislate and set tax rates for the rest of us. It would be quite easy to cure all this nonsense about non-doms by doing as they do in the USA, and making every one who lives here liable to full UK taxation.

I never had much confidence in the Cameron and Osborne dynamic duo and as time goes by and they drift along from one cock-up to the next, I am having less and less. All the polls show the Tory lead over Labour narrowing and we haven't had any post Ashcroft figures yet. If Labour can hold a steady hand it seems likely that they will draw level with the Tories and if reflected in a General Election, this would keep them in power with a working majority. I am no great enthusiast for this Labour government but I do believe that most of the damage was done by Blair and he left the poisoned chalice to Brown. Brown may be a bully and bad tempered but he still looks like the best Prime Minister we are likely to get.

/

An Identity Crisis?

It was Harold Wilson who said, famously, that a week is a long time in politics. And, if I may begin a sentence with a conjunction, this last week has certainly seemed a long time. So many things have happened, some very depressing.

One matter, which is certainly depressing for all those involved, concerns the politics of justice. This week, John Venables, who with Robert Thompson was responsible for the brutal murder of 2 year old Jamie Bulger in 1993, was recalled to prison for having breached the terms of his licence. We don't yet know why he was recalled but several newspapers have reported some claims, which, if true, are quite astonishing. Dealing with Venables and Thompson has so far cost us, the tax-payers, in excess of £4.5 million. This is way beyond anything that would be spent on a victim of crime and we have to consider if it is beyond all reason - especially so if, as now seems likely, it has been for John Venables completely unproductive. He was, apparently, mollycoddled through the prison system, living in very comfortable conditions, given a private education - it all cost more than sending him to Eton - and allowing him out on occasions to go to football matches, etc. As an essential part of his release into society at large, his true identity has been hidden and we have created for him a new virtual reality of a life complete with new documents and new name. The system demands that, in order to maintain his new identity, it is crucial that no one outside of a very select few knows the truth. Now we are being told that, since his release in 2001, Venables has been picked up several times by the police for drugs offences, that he has worked as a bouncer - with police and his employers kept in the dark about his real background - and that he has now been arrested following a serious incident. The Home Secretary and the Justice Secretary seem to have commented on the case without talking to each other - which says something about joined up government - and we are told by the liberals of the beans and sandals variety that we must allow matters to take their course.

I took the view in 1993, when Michael Howard said that these two murderers should be locked up for a minimum of 15 years [subsequently reduced to eight years by the Court of Appeal] that we should lock them up and throw the key away. The Establishment took the view that this was unacceptable when the crime was committed by 10 year-olds. Perhaps they are right, but all the signs at this moment are that Venables, at least, will ultimately be locked up for ever. When we will know the full story is difficult to say but the situation is sufficiently so serious that the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, is going to talk to the family of James Bulger. I think we can take it as read that he would not be doing this if Venables had been recalled for a mere technical infringement of the terms of his licence.

At this present time, there are only four people living in this country who have been given new identities following their involvements in serious crimes and it seems that Venables is the only case that has unravelled. Let us hope that there are no more nasty developments.

/

The Olympic Legacy

The Olympic Games - both the summer and winter varieties - continue to boggle the mind. These exercises in national virility become ever more absurd, yet no-one dares to question whether we can stop the juggernaut and do something else.

The Winter Olympics in and around Vancouver have now ended and the Canadians can get down to the task of sorting out how they will pay for the event. They have only just finished paying for the 1976 summer Olympics in Montreal and I suspect that they will need a year or two to pay for this latest jamboree. I have tried to find out what were the estimated and the actual costs for the whole event. So far I have failed. During 2009, the auditor general for British Columbia was trying to do the same and failed. If he can't find out, the rest of us haven't much chance. Even a year ago John Doyle [the auditor general] was ready to throw in the towel and give up. The official estimate 3 years ago was about $1.6 billion - sounds like plenty you might think - but, as is usual with these types of estimate, no one is quite sure what was and what was not included. So what did they actually cost and who is paying for it? No one seems to know. One estimate says $6 billion +. The organisers have pumped out all the usual clap-trap about the legacy and the benefits for the future - ignoring the fact that all the evidence shows that in 100% of cases there are no benefits - just debts. One newspaper in Vancouver is suggesting that they will be paying for these games for decades to come. And so will Ontario and Quebec and .......... all of whom threw millions of dollars into the project. Then there was the spending on athletes to try to ensure that Canada did at least win some medals at their own games. I suppose that later this year somebody will have come up with some sort of estimate of what are the true costs. But, then it will be too late.

Our own event for 2012 will be a similar exercise in obfuscatory accounting. It already is. The total cost is now said to be £9.5 billion. It has been at this figure for some time now having risen rather rapidly from the original £2.6 billion. The current figure is obviously wrong and from now on all the parties involved will have to concentrate their efforts on ensuring that any more extra costs are somehow kept off balance sheet. My estimate is that the games will actually cost between £15 billion and £20 billion - surely an absurd amount of money. Minority sports that will cost £1 billion for each day of the games!!!!!!!!!! Periodically, they wheel out Sebastian Coe to tell us what a wondrous thing these Olympic Games will be and what a marvellous legacy they will leave behind. He has become rich from these Olympic Games but otherwise he is clearly mad.

The latest piece of nonsense is the revelation that all the people of London who have paid £250 per household for this extravaganza will not be able to actual watch any of the main events. About 80% of all the tickets in the main stadium will be allocated to officials and corporate sponsors and buying one of the remaining 20% will cost at least £1,000 per ticket. You should be able to get in to see synchronized drowning at 8.00 am in the pool and you may even be able to watch the cyclists in the velodrome, but the 100 metres final - forget it.

I am looking forward to the traffic chaos and the jam-ups caused by the priority routes scheme for athletes, officials and hangers-on. And the blaming and the search for scapegoats and ..........

/