With Thanks to Complete and Utter Zebu

Simon Rose reminded me with this report that if Carlsberg did disingenuous it would probably be the the "green" energy lobby.  In particluar and as Simon demonstrates, the wind power supporters do more than their fair share of manipulation.  Here's some examples from the European Wind Energy Association.  According to this august body the benefits include:

• "Wind power has a light footprint. Its, operation does not produce harmful emissions or any hazardous waste. It does not deplete natural resources, nor does it cause environmental damage, through resource extraction, transport, and waste management.
• In a wind farm the turbines themselves, take up less than 1% of the land area.  Once up and running, existing activities such as agriculture and hiking can continue around them. Farm animals such as cows and sheep are not disturbed.
• Any impacts on the local environment (see below) must be set against the much more serious effects of producing conventional electricity and thereby aggravating the pressures of climate change on the balance of nature."

Okay then let's look at those "benefits". 

• Certainly one turbine has a "light" footprint.  Except you need a lot of them to produce a reasonable amount of power.  True they don't emit any pollutants or gases but unless we re categorize excessive noise as "harmelss emissions" they do present a serious noise hazard.  Indeed the nearest a turbine can be placed to housing is 300m.  Just visulaise that for a minute.  Thats a 300m wide band of valuable land that can't be utilised due to noise.
• The second point is really the first regurgetated.  Loads of space between the turbines but only for deaf cattle and sheep it appears.
• The final point is trite in the extreme.  It assumes that the current methods are "aggravating climate change" which may be true but ignores nuclear energy which in my opnion would be a better method of producing power per M2 occupied.

But this website does not provide a balanced reply to each of its befeficial arguments.  It does do that for the disadvantages though.

• "Wind power’s overall impact on birds, bats, other wildlife and natural habitats is highly site specifi c. In addition, impacts from wind power are extremely low compared with other humanrelated activities. Deaths from birds fl ying into wind turbines represent a small fraction of those caused by other human-related sources such as cats and buildings.  US statistics show 1 billion birds are killed by colliding with buildings each year and up to 80 million by vehicles.  By comparison, it’s estimated that commercial wind turbines in the US cause the direct deaths of only 0.01 – 0.02% of all of the birds killed annually by collisions with man-made structures and activities."

I confess that this one makes me smile.  Apparently we would significantly reduce the amount of birds killed if we get rid of those nasty buildings and cats.  Of course with no buildings there'd be no need for power thus no need for wind turbines.  But the really good bit of the above logic is the stats concerning the percentage of birds killed by wind farms.  Could it just possibly be that there are significantly more square metres of buildings than there are wind turbines in the USA?

In short the wind power lobby is telling porky pies.

Anyone Else Smell a Rat? (Not I'm A Celebrity).

So as I understand it the Royal Bank of Scotland owns a substantial portion of a total of 167 Billion pounds Sterling, yup quite a large lunch that, in overseas, mostly toxic, debt. But what is interesting about this story (as opposed to downright depressing) is this snippet "Similarly striking is the fact that in almost all of the asset classes, the majority of the loans now being supported by the taxpayer were made only very recently, some of them in 2008, only months before the bank was semi-nationalised."

Now you may call me a cynic but considering this is the Royal Bank of Scotland and as we know senior members of our government (for want of a better word) hail from that, actually very pleasant, part of the UK, doesn't it seem mildly coincidental that a lot of these debts were ramped up by the bank, just before it rolled over and swallowed all that lovely taxpayer funding?

Likewise isn't it nice to know that whilst Lloyds Banking Group has returned a large portion of wonga to the Treasury, the Royal Bank of Scotland, is paying it back. When would of course be nice to know, but I doubt we'll find that out during this parliament.

If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat, it probably is a rat.

Balance

A lot of us tend to look at the oil and gas majors as being money makers with no thought for the impact on the lives of the people who they either employ or who live in areas where they work. In other words they care little about the environment. The BBC produced this somewhat sensationalised programme in 2004. Among the inaccuracies was that accusation that the oil trains running through the region belonged to the BTC company. They didn't. Thus the arguments surrounding the railway slums were inaccurate to say the least.

It is true that these companies are driven by money. Clearly they wouldn't build a pipeline unless it could transport valuable product to a suitable location. Nor would they build a refinery in a location where there was no infrastructure or means of moving the refined product to other destinations. Politically these companies need to show the countries in which they work, that the project is a valid and important one for the country and indeed the company's shareholders. Many things have imposed themselves on these projects over the years, not least environmental impact and health and safety, both political hot potatoes.

In 1996 the western world was coming to terms with the collapsed Soviet Union, but knew strategically that relying on putting oil through the Russian Federation carried risks to the supply. At around that time I worked on the Western Route Pipeline which runs from Baku in Azerbaijan to Supsa in Georgia. The Russians had previously built a pipeline along the route and this was a replacement for an old and inefficient facility. At the time that this project was muted a more ambitious project was taking shape. It became known as the BTC Pipeline and ran from Baku, through Georgia to Ceyhan in Turkey on the Mediterranean coast. I worked on that one too.

I tend to get involved in larger projects these days and after a spell in Russia on a project in the Arctic Circle I found myself here in Doha working on one of three Mega LNG projects. You can find the public info here. I'm working on the last one to be commissioned which is due in 2010.

My particular project is employing upwards of 20,000 people from all parts of the world (yes you read that right 20k). Apart from the Middle East countries they come from India, Pakistan, Turkey, America, Europe, Australia, Philippines, you name it they come from there. A diverse and seriously multi cultural workforce. As expected this creates a logistical nightmare for those who have to deal with housing, feeding and the general welfare of all of these nationalities.

Something we must never forget is the level of expectation that these people have. From the UK or US or any of the "western" nations, we expect good quality service, good food and health care and good accommodation. It is also likely that the definition of these concepts is vastly different for those from the emerging countries such as India and Pakistan, or Thailand etc. So, my employer has concluded that it is of major importance to ensure as far as is practicable, the workforce enjoys the best possible living conditions. To this end there are certain minimum standards set by the Qatari government. These standards have been enhanced by the company that runs the location where the project is being constructed (a sort of local council if you will). You or more particularly the BBC, may argue that these are ultimately politically and PR motivated measures, you are entitled to hold that opinion. But then again a happy and safe workforce is more efficient and easier to manage.

So are the Oil and Gas companies the heartless brutes we or the BBC think they are? If I told you how much money is expended on making sure these people (I include myself here) get to finish the project healthy and hopefully more wealthy than when they arrived, your eyes would water. So I ask that when you see headlines screaming about the nastiness of these projects, take a moment to consider what the companies are trying to do for their people.

Space - The Only Frontier?

Anyway to all those climate change folks I need an answer to the following.

How many Km2 do you need for a wind farm to produce the power of (let's say) Fiddler's Ferry Power Station?

Only it appears to me, that if we were to move over to offshore wind power we'd need to shove an awful lot of concrete and steel into those oceans to the extent that the displacement may well raise the sea levels, just so that we can provide enough power to energise our solar panels in the winter.

Or have I missed my guess here?

Re-Develop Donington Park? How silly can you be?

Donington Park in Leicestershire was the first permanent "road" type race circuit in the world; pre dating Indianapolis by a year Brooklands, where the majority of British motor races were held in the 1930s was a large banked oval track in Weybridge Surrey. It closed to motor racing in 1939 with the onset of the Second World War and would not open for racing again. Interestingly this is where the RAF WW2 bomber the Wellington was produced thus it is not a little ironic that Mercedes Benz now has a museum and test track there.

But Donington was also quite famous, not least for two major races(both known as the Donington Grand Prix) involving the German Mercedes Benz and Auto Union teams in 1937 and 1938. There was a bit of an outcry at the time because of course these two teams were used by the Nazi government as nothing more than propaganda machines. Indeed there was great play made of the fact that one of their drivers was a british man by the name of Richard Seaman. As with Brooklands, racing ceased in 1939 and the circuit was used as a vehicle store by the ministry of defence, eventually falling into disrepair. Which is why in 1971 the late

Tom Wheatcroft, a construction contractor and motor sport enthusiast who was born in Castle Donington, bought it and reconfigured the track into a 1.9 mile circuit. The first meeting of the new era was a motorcycle meeting in 1977. From then many motorcycle and car meetings have taken place, including major touring car events such as the Tourist Trophy (TT) 500km, GT and Sports Prototype races, Moto GP and Superbikes and famously in 1993 the European Formula One Grand Prix.

Moving forward to 2007 and the British GP at Silverstone, where the then President of the FIA Max Mosley, announced to what can only be described as general amazement, that from 2010 the British GP would be held at Donington. It seems that Bernie Ecclestone the supremo of Formula One had been in discussion with the leaseholder of Donington Park Circuit, a company known as Donington Ventures Leisure Limited (DVLL) and they had signed a contract to host the GP from 2010 for a period of 17 years.

We must Take nothing away from Donington Park as a circuit but if the location and logistical issues represented to anyone wishing to host an event where at least 70,000 people would turn up on one day a "difficulty", the amount of work required to re configure the track, build the necessary infrastructure, pits complex and grand stands, presented at the time what can only be described as a serious challenge. In particular the proposed method of financing the scheme was novel in its approach, involving banks and individuals who would buy debentures for rather large sums. Of course at the time of the announcement, very few people realised that the financial institues would be entering meltdown within a year, the feeling among many was that whilst a massive task the scheme was (just) possible.

That was 2007; by March 2009 the full effects of the worldwide recession were being felt and even if Gordon Brown felt it necessary to blame our American cousins, his stance made little difference to us in the UK or indeed anyone else in the world. By this time (20 months after the initial announcement) we had little indication of any work at the circuit other than the installation of an access tunnel under the track. This it turned out would prove a major headache for DVLL because the design of the tunnel created a dangerous section of the track and therefore resulted in the eventual removal of the track licence until such time as it was reconfigured. A further problem was the stability of the tunnel which lead to a collapse of the track surface and therefore remedial work in order to support it. An inauspicious start tot he 2009 season and a prtent of waht was to come. By now of course even staunch supporters were more than a little concerned.

I last raced at Donington on 23 August 2009, after it had been through a truamatic season associated with cancelled races and track licence problems due to that tunnel. To say it was run down would be an understatement but the general lack of enthuisiasm around the place was sad. Furthermore apart from the tunnel there was little evidence of any attempt to get on with the major work involved in the required improvements. Of course we were now 11 months away from the 2010 GP and worryingly DVLL had not yet announced the funding deal. But by end September 2009 the infield had been largely excavated and things did appear to be moving on apace! Indeed trenches for services have been cut across the track and barriers removed etc.

The skeptics among us (me included) just could not see how the miracle, at the time delayed by a year, could ever be realised. Well we know now that it cannot be realised because sadly DVLL has been put into administration, possibly owing many millions of pounds as we understand it, and of course the construction has ceased.

So what are we left with?

It is currently uncertain as to who will take over the reins of this circuit, or indeed if anyone will at all! At best we can expect an uncertain race calendar for 2010 and at worst it means the loss of a major motor sport asset to the UK and motor sport enthusiasts far and wide. But let us not forget, this destruction of what was Tom Wheatcroft's dream has been perpetrated on the altar of greed, nothing more nothing less.

Rest in Peace Tom.

Ans: Beat it, but I prefer letting it stand for a day.

I twittered that to someone last night. As a double entendre it has a certain flare don't you think?

It is also a great example of how something perfectly normal may be misconstrued by many.

Unfortunately in this era of authoritarianism and political correctness, our lives are regularly controlled by people who are more than willing to take perfectly good situations and construe them in a way that suits the agenda of the day. Notwithstanding the current furore surrounding the "climategate" e mails, (why is everything perceived as "scandalous" now a gate?) there's the light bulb scam in the UK perpetrated by the EU and supported by the government (although that is a loose description of the bunch of nincompoops currently trying to run the country). The deal here was to reduce the use of energy by ceasing the production and sale of traditional tungsten light bulbs. These would be replaced by the low energy "long life" type of bulb. In turn this would mean people would have less need to replace the bulbs thereby providing two savings, energy for lighting and production of bulbs.

Of course the makers of these bulbs that are much more expensive than tungsten bulbs, are delighted because you see, they produce less light than a tungsten bulb, therefore people are going to install additional light fittings and of course light bulbs, thereby increasing the profit of the makers. We can also assume that the cost in energy terms for making these bulbs is increased due to quantity although I suspect (hope?) the energy required per bulb is lower. Here's a link to one article on the subject. And what about the risk of mercury from discarded bulbs? Pravda er sorry, the BBC had this report concerning the toxicity of these light bulbs in January this year. No doubt we can expect a "green" tax to be levied on individuals who try to dispose of these bulbs in future.

So the EU's environmental credentials are as ever questionable (along with its ethical and moral credentials) and indeed Gordon Brown and his mob have questions to answer, yet will never do so.

Anyway the question that elicited the answer in the title was "How do you tenderize beef?"

Think before pressing send

You know that feeling you get when you've just texted your wife or girlfriend (or both?) and told her in explicit detail exactly what you're going to do her when you get home, then just as you press "send" you realise its gone to your mum's number? Then there's the moment when you've just written a wonderfully bile filled e mail to your boss and instead of pressing "save in drafts" you press "send........................."?

Well I'm guessing a bit here but those extremely clever peeps at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) may just be having feelings somewhat similar to those I describe above. For it seems that the arguments for Climate Change may not be as compelling as the experts and Al Gore would have us believe. Take a look at this website where a number of e mails between climate change researchers have been hacked and published. It's a fairly extensive library which unfortunately includes examples of manipulation of findings in order to exaggerate the effects of climate change as we understand it to be. We are told that this information is really of little consequence and of course has been taken out of context. Oookay then. This release of information, whether it be out of context or not, is not what governments want to see for if there is contrary evidence to the scaremongering then it may well dent their ability to charge us for the use of our cars, central heating/air conditioning (delete as appropriate) etc. Of course you may call me a cynic but green taxes are not there to reduce consumption, they are there to make easy money for governments. Ergo there is little governmental energy devoted to actual reduction of usage because that would have a negative effect on the tax revenues.

But let us not be one sided or possibly cynical here because of course pumping CO2 and other substances such as unspent hydrocarbons into the atmosphere quite probably does have a bit of a negative effect on our lives. And of course we don't want to end those lives back in mud huts with no electricity but a nice view of the rapidly rising seas. So efficient use of resources may be a better answer than carbon credits (how do they work?) etc.

Some might say that motorsport is one of the worst forms of sport for burning hydrocarbans. It just will never be green. I tend to agree, however before people look towards motorsport for a relief from Climate Change I suggest they look towards the various governments who take our money but instead of making life more efficient, spend it on civil services and quangos, both of which in the UK are too big or too many or both! Surely if that cash was spent on transport systems there'd be a lot less unburnt hydrocarbons in the atmosphere because there'd be less traffic jams and therefore fuel efficiency would rise? And on that subject of course a racing car uses its fuel as efficiently as it can because it does not sit for hours in traffic jams!

So, I have a theory about Climate Change, which as we know can only be determined since records began (in around 1910 I believe) and my theory is this. The climate changes, live with it.

Why Expats Become Racist

The Qatar Visitor Blog produced a list of 10 reasons to stay in Qatar. Interestingly it came up with 14 reasons to leave. One of those reasons was this:

5. You are becoming racist. It's a strange thing, a thing which my wife pointed out to me, but many people seem to become racist here. Perhaps its human nature that a melting pot of human culture can lead more often to mutual disrespect than to mutual understanding.

So why would a person who has traveled the world, met interesting people, caught interesting diseases (oops old joke sorry), worked with some great "foreign" colleagues, become racist?

Here's a few examples.

In Europe and the USA there are concepts of courtesy. Courtesy extends to road use and care for your fellow human being.

I drove into the City Centre shopping mall car park in Doha a few weeks ago and saw a spot conveniently located near to the entrance. The only problem was a shopping trolley parked across the space. I stopped the car, noted that there was a petrol camel (Landcruiser) in the space behind but failed to note that the engine was running and there was a Qatari behind the wheel. I moved the trolley and returned to my car, when I attempted to enter the space I found a Landcruiser moving into it. The Qatari got out gave me a disdainful look and walked away. I admit I found it funny and was laughing to myself. The fact that this guy considered his actions to be a) polite and b) legitimate made me think he was and probably is a complete lowlife. A sense of humour would have saved his reputation.

Then there's the reception in my apartment building. I have a problem with my floor tiles, they are marble and are lifting from the substrate. Not unusual in this part of the world. Anyway I asked for a maintenance man to survey the problem and report back. Tonight I approached the desk and had the following conversation:

Me. "Good evening how are you?" Filipino receptionist "Hi sir can I help you?".

Me. "Hi how are you?" Her. "Yes sir what can I do for you?"

Okay I decided to change my tack. "I have a problem with my floor ti............... " "yes sir I'll ask the maintenance manager to come to your apartment" she picks up the phone.

"Er no I asked yesterday for someone to come to my apartment to survey the floor tiles. I asked for them to come in today, did it happen?"

"I'll phone the maintenance manager and ask him to come up right away."

By now I'm running out of options and thinking how satisfying it would be to throttle the stupid tart and get a replacement who could a) comprehend English and b) tell me the news even if it was bad.

I walked away. for the record my tiles are popping as I type!

Other situations are just plain rude.

There is a tendancy to ignore road signs here. I've never experienced this anywhere else because the slightest wrongdoing leads to a bribe at the police bank, but here? I had occasion to confront a local who was driving north in a one way street that was south pointing. When I suggested he might consider other road users he turned to his girlfriend then back to me and said "when you are a policeman you can make me change, until then piss off.".

So you see there's every reason to dislike the locals in this part of the world. There is no courtesy and definitely no honour. Just a creed.

That said I was waiting to exit a junction recently and a Qatari in a Tahoe who had right of way, stopped, flashed his lights and waved me out.

Just that one act of courtesy made my day.

Spa Francorchamps

The car you see in the picture is a Ford Capri 3.0s. It is built to replicate the car that won the Spa Francorchamps 24hrs race in 1978. I race this car and have done for around 15 years. In fact you could say that they'll have to surgically remove it from me when I die!

Anyway Spa Francorchamps is a fantastic circuit set in the Belgian Ardennes. As a racing theatre it is second to none and for many reasons is the favourite circuit of nearly all racing drivers. We race there every year at around the end of September and this year was no different. The event is the FIA 6hrs of spa Francorchamps and as the name suggests the weekend includes a six hour race for cars built prior to 31 December 1965. These cars run as Appendix A which is a category specific to the FIA. For the last three years, not only have I raced my Capri in one or more of the support races, I have also shared an MGB in the 6hours race. This has led to a busy if tremendous weekend.

This is the MGB as it looked during the 2008 race. It is a lovely little car and a delight to drive. Not the fastest out there but certainly not the slowest. But you need your wits about you because cars such as GT40s and Cobras are also in the race and they are significantly faster.

Anyway this year we decided to enter only one of the one-hour support races with the Capri and of course the 6hours with the MG.

It was somewhat disappointing to arrive at Spa on the Thursday to be greeted by rain, so any chances of practicing were washed away. It was therefore necessary to guess at the suspension settings for qualifying which would be dry the next day.

We qualified the car 24th out of 66, which was not too shabby. We were third in our class and had lapped 5 seconds quicker than any previous attempts. The race looked promising. This is a two driver race with a compulsory pit stop and we elected to stop at half way. My co driver would take the start. Unfortunately when we came to start the car before the race on Saturday morning, it refused to fire up until it was too late to leave the pit lane. The result was that not only would we start from the back, we'd have to catch up with the field that had already been warmed up! This incidentally is why the headlights are on. Get out of the way we're coming through!

My co driver performed brilliantly so that when I took over we were in 40th place. Every lap produced overtaking opportunities and the car felt fantastic. I could get on the gas so much earlier and of course I was able to drive through Blanchiment flat in top, something that previous years had required a lift to get the nose turned in. Due to the lappery we never got to beat our qualifying time but we did overtake the two cars in our class that started ahead of us and we finished 24th and first in class.

All was looking good for the 6hours.

I was due to take the start in the MG at 4pm and would run for 1 1/2 hours for the first stint. After that it would be another 1 1/2 hours for my co driver then I'd get back in for my second and final stint. I've spent around ten hours in the car and was looking forward to another good result for the weekend. Sadly it was not to be.

On my 6th lap a Lotus Elan approached me at very high speed as I was entering Pouhon, a double apex left hand bend. You enter in third gear and accelerate through taking top gear at the second apex. Anyway I saw the Lotus approaching and waved him down the inside and prepared to follow him through. That's when it went wrong. The driver of the Lotus slowed as he pulled in front of me, I saw he was struggling to control the car which was sliding sideways and over the kerbs. I had little choice but to move back on line and take the corner as normal. Sadly the other driver was still struggling and speared back on to the track, into the rear of my car.

Here is the result.

I spun into the barrier, then spun around and rolled, returning to what was left of the four wheels.

Without giving away names I can tell you that the other driver is a well known ex touring car and F3000 driver. I went to see him in the paddock afterwards to shake hands and commiserate. As far as I was concerned it was a racing incident. The only thing we did wrong was enter the race, yet this lord of all he races, took it upon himself to berate me and suggest that it was all my fault. I decided to walk away and went for a beer.

So, unlike previous years the unsporting behaviour of another competitor dampened what could have been a great weekend. Even the crash hadn't taken away the satisfaction of our class win earlier in the day.

But, that's not the end. The car is being repaired as I write and will return to the tracks next season. In the meantime there's a weekend of historic motor sport planned at Abu Dhabi 21 to 23 January 2010. 60', 70's and 80s, Sports Prototypes and Formula 1 cars will be heading out from Europe and we may even try to get them to Qatar later next year.

Friends

What is it with people these days? Or could it be me? I'm forced to consider whether I continue with my current input to various organisations and websites simply because I seem to be moving away from the consensus on many areas.

Take the recent events in the Formula 1 Championship.

I have been a fan of Jenson Button since he arrived in the category. Being away most of the time, he hadn't appeared on my radar prior to that. It was the same with Kimi. I observed his arrival then the Benetton/Renault years when Flavio, blatantly in my opinion, used Button to enhance the reputations of his contracted drivers, Fisichella. Flav made money but history tells us that Fisi has very little fizz and as for Trulli? The perceived wisdom is that Flav was aggravated when Button rented a yacht and moored it in a prime location in Monaco for his first GP there. That was also the "playboy" period and Jenson was living the dream. Possibly incorrect but not a hanging offence.

Then he moved into a team that had been built around its star driver Jacques Villeneuve, who proclaimed that Jenson was an also ran. That was the turning point for many, because the also ran creamed his illustrious partner and went on to lead the team. If people didn't know it then, I suggest they were either blind or biased because we were witnessing a talent in the making.

Along the way, and let's not forget he is still only 29, he made some mistakes. Jerking Sir Frank Williams around is not a good thing to do so, like many, I was critical of his actions at that time. Indeed I couldn't see any good reason to stay at BAR (nee Honda) which was sadly under performing. But stay he did.

Moving on, he scored his and the team's first and indeed only, win at Budapest in 2006. Certainly he was mildly lucky to win when Alonso broke down but he was applying sufficient pressure in second place to make Alonso push harder than he might. All of which lead to the circumstance I described. But all through that season he was consistently in the top six. More evidence that he was no "also ran".

Last season (2008) was a year to forget. The car was a dog and although he was being beaten by his team mate he remained loyal to the team and made very little complaint.

Then, when things were looking good for 2009, Honda quit. Not only did this impact the team, it had ramifications all through the grid that would continue to this day with the retreat of the under performing Toyota just this week.

So what is the point of this post? Well, I've seen some good reasons for disliking a person and let's face it, anyone who is famous is there to be critiqued but surely the following is just plain daft?

Apparently Jenson Button is not worthy of being the World Champion because;

"He wants more money next year and yet loads of people in his team were downsized last year."

"He's already trousering shed loads of money yet there are people who have no work."

"When he was nine he had a crash in a Kart race and his dad berated the marshal."

"He spent a lot of time saying "I'm the World Champion" and didn't acknowledge the team."

I could go on but the above quotes are paraphrased from various conversations and my answer to them in order was:

He took a massive pay cut to support the team at the beginning of the season and having done everything he could, surely it isn't unreasonable to expect a pay rise?

Like many people I am fortunately working, I'm sure those who are out of work would be really grateful if I took a pay cut or indeed resigned in order to give them employment. No it doesn't work does it? Likewise why should Jenson be punished because he is a success?

If you are that bitter about something after twenty years, you lead a really sad existence. Furthermore as deplorable as berating a marshal is, it was his dad not Jenson doing the berating.

I guess his rendition of Queen's "We are the champions" and his interview where he thanked the team don't count then? Although I do think he should retire from his singing career.

So, what to do? I'm currently reconsidering my list of friends because for the record I never knew they were so small minded.

You live and learn.

I'm a believer.........................................

.....................was a song by the Monkees, a sixties beat combo of marginal talent. However I do believe in loads of things and there are even some things I'm willing to believe in that so far, I don't. As a f'rinstance I'm quite prepared to believe Gordon Brown is a nice bloke (well, that is a bit of a stretch but you never know). Then I'm prepared to believe that there is a more ethical way to produce Fois Gras. I believe in Father Christmas (run with me on this please) and of course the tooth fairy. Well, I got pressies as a kid at Christmas and also got money every time a tooth fell out.

I believe the Australian cricket team is one of the best in the world surpassed only by England. Indeed the same applies to Rugby teams. I believe Micheal Schumacher was/is a damned fine driver who made a few minor mistakes. I believe Tiger Woods is the best golfer the world has seen.

But, and here I really am struggling.................................






I can't believe a Force India driven by Fisichella is on pole a Spa Francorchamps!

The Return of TGF (That German Fellow)

“Don’t get me wrong but…………..”. Words that are usually spoken, or written, as a preamble to justify an opinion that may differ from the audience and it is used many times when referring to a driver or a team in motorsport forums (fora?). As a for instance, the recent happenings in Formula One. Certainly the events that have left Felipe Massa out of the rest of the 2009 Championship are very sad, however his reported recovery is very good news indeed. But, what about the news of his replacement, a certain German Fellow by the name of Michael Schumacher, who some may recall won seven World Driver’s Championships between 1994 and 2007 when he hung up his helmet for, what we all assumed was “good”?

Oh how wrong we were. He’s back as Felipe’s stand-in and with over half the season gone one asks what he can achieve? Indeed whatever he does there are many questions that will be left hanging by November 2009. Let’s look at some of them.
He comes back finishes at best third in one of the races, all the rest are fifth or lower. What to make of that, if he beats Kimi in any of those races then it must mean Kimi is pretty ropey. If he loses to Kimi in any of those races it must mean he’s not very good anymore.

He comes back, blows everyone into the weeds and runs the Driver’s World Championship to the wire. Hmm, then after a two year lay off these cars must have got too easy to drive because otherwise how would he do it? And what does it say about the rest of the grid?

For my part I’m just looking forward to seeing him back, although I’m no fan per se, his less “ethical” actions have soured his name for me, but there can be no doubt he is or was extremely talented but because of the issues above this is going to make the final part of the season extremely interesting.

Now, one more point which may be somewhat controversial. According to this years rules, there is no in-season testing. Thus when new boy Jaime Alguersuari was chosen to replace Sebastian Bourdais at Torro Rosso, he got precisely zero miles in testing. As a rookie he qualified for the necessary Superlicence by winning the British Formula 3 Championship. Yet as that rookie, in other words someone who has limited or no Formula 1 experience, he had to get used to it in the Hungarian GP weekend. However our multiple World Champion has (we understand) received dispensation to test a car for a day. Thus his team will no doubt also benefit from this extra curriculum, albeit sanctioned, activity.

Yes let us celebrate the return of the chin but let’s also look at the impact of the decision. I hope it all works out for the best but don’t get me wrong here, I hope he doesn’t show the rest of the circus up.

A Tales of Lost Talent

It is always sad when we lose a driver in a motor sport accident. It's even more sad when that driver is a young and up and coming talent. Not only has that driver lost his or her life, he or she has also lost the opportunity to shine and like a bright star that may have been their talent is snuffed out in an instant.

So it was eighteen years ago when Paul Warwick at the age of 22 lost his life whilst in the lead of a British Formula 3000 championship race. He'd dominated that category all season and had a very strong lead when at the fifth round, whilst once again dominating the race, when near the end his car’s right front suspension failed at Knickerbrook, which was an extremely quick corner at that time. The car disintegrated in the ensuing accident and, despite prompt medical attention, Paul died without ever regaining consciousness.

Read more: http://autoracing.suite101.com/article.cfm/paul_warwick#ixzz0MAWrZvM2

I recall at the time being very sad because his brother Derek was one of my favourite racers and we all knew that Paul was going to be as good if not better. We'd never see him shine brighter than in that last season though and the world of motor sport lost a real talent.

Fast forward to 19 July 2009 and an eighteen year old Henry Surtees is running down in ninth place in the second of two Formula 2 races at Brands Hatch. He'd finished on the podium in third place the day before and was in ninth because of a spin earlier in the race. Sadly as he was running back through the field he was hit by an errant wheel that had been torn off the car of Jack Clarke, who had spun into the armco at Westfield Bend. Although Surtees collided with the barriers at the following Sheene Curve he was unconscious and would not recover form the injuries he suffered from the collision with the wheel.

So where is the link in these two tragic accidents? Well firstly Henry was only just born when Paul lost his life and in that time many safety improvements have been made in single seater motor sport. That said it is impossible to tell if the tethers that have been introduced to retain wheels in the event of an accident, would have worked for Paul. It is certain that they didn't work for Jack Clarke at Brands Hatch.

But the one point of all this that has made me think, is the need for many people to find someone to blame. It seems that for some people the thought that motor racing is dangerous has just struck them like a bolt from the blue. Even more disturbing is that the finger pointing has gone as far as to accuse the organiser MSV, which is owned by ex racer Dr Jonathan Palmer, of skimping on safety. Frankly I find this attitude appalling and furthermore childish in the extreme. These finger pointers, fail to consider the feelings of those involved, not only Henry's family and friends but the marshals and medical staff who all tried so hard to save him. Don't these people realise that Henry was doing what he loved doing and he wasn't too shoddy at it either?

Ultimately we will get the findings of the enquiry and that will either suggest that something went awry or there is something that needs to be changed. However nothing will bring Henry back no more than it would Paul.

These two drivers are inextricably linked in my mind as two young guns who could never realise their full potential. That's a cruel enough fact on its own, it doesn't need a blame culture to make things worse.

With thanks to Pink Floyd

Well I’m Lost For Words! This must be The Final Cut because it looks like there’s Nobody Home. Our Prime Minister is either Comfortably Numb or just Waiting for the Worms. Never mind though The Tide is Turning, he’s looking through Paranoid Eyes but it will be a Great Day for Freedom when it All Makes Perfect Sense and we get rid of New Labour!

Holidays (or Vacations to our friends in the "colonies").

Sooooo, what's been happening in the world whilst I've been partying, eating, lazing on a beach (yes even in the UK), testing and racing my racing car?
The Tories lost an important election. Nope not the EU elections which only served to demonstrate the sheer contempt that the Labour Government is deservedly held in by the British populace. Nope this is the election that the Labour party should have held to remove their prime minister (I use no capitals because he is a small minded individual of little import). Yep the Tories lost it because instead of encouraging the Labour ministers and MPs to do something they ignored it and preferred to gloat (albeit justifiably) about the lack of support and the increase in control that each party has respectively achieved in the local elections.

Brown you are the weakest link. Go now for goodness' sake. And no kissing Anne Robinson either!

However on to more important things. I went to Jersey, that's an island in what we like to call the English channel, where we had great weather for a few days and then English weather for a few days and I gained about three kilos eating and drinking great food and wine. The eating the food and drinking the wine of course. Eating wine tends to hurt when the glass breaks. Anyway I highly recommend the place, it has cliffs, waves, fishing, walks, greenery, and of course restaurants and bars. Go, you won't be disappointed.

Right now I ache a bit. I'm sitting in the BA lounge in Heathrow, waiting for the delayed flight to Doha. I'm aching because I raced my car yesterday and for 45mins in a pretty hot cockpit I fought a monster that was trying desperately to throw itself at the scenery! This was a bit of a shame because prior to yesterday I tested the car and it was brilliant! Going quicker and needing less effort to make it go! Anyway aching or not I went faster than before at the circuit, Kept it on the island and netted a second place pot. As you know real men come second, so that's all right.

MP's Expenses, that accounts for it!

So, the question is who is watching the watcher, when the watcher is being watched?

Of all the lame brained schemes to come from our useless idiotic lame duck of a Prime Minister, is the idea that we need an independent body to check the MP’s expenses. So, its jobs for more of “the boys” and therefore more civil servants to clog up the over burdened state.

If it wasn’t so appallingly incompetent and indeed corrupt, it would be funny. The fact is these people (ministers and MPs) are there on trust and if they can’t be trusted get rid of them. Don’t give them a slapped wrist and claim they are victims of the system, which is what an “independent body” would do and our (using the term loosely) Honourable PM is trying to do.

Sack those who’ve done wrong and let’s move on. Let’s not allow this painful and sadly ruinous debacle to continue any longer. Election time.

Why Can't the FIA Diffuse this?

Well what a surprise! Here we are two races into the new Formula 1 season and lo' some of the teams disagree with others over the interpetation of the regs surrounding diffusers. Interestingly this is all the late Colin Chapman's fault. I kid you not. Back in 1977 the late great engineer, designed a Formula 1 car that aerodynamically surpassed anything that went before. Whilst Patrick Head at Williams was designing possibly the prettiest conventional "flat bottomed" Formula 1 car (the FW06) for the 1978 season, Colin had been studying aircraft design and came up with ground effect. It wasn't new by any means but making it fit with the Formula 1 regulations of the time made his solution innovative.

In essence Colin was using inverted wings on the side of his car to generate downforce as opposed to the normal "lift" seen on an aircraft. This downforce enabled the car to drive through corners much more quickly than traditional flat bottomed cars because the faster it went the more it was stuck to the ground. In the face of this leap of engineering innovation, what did the other teams do? Well, the teams got on with life and went racing. That year Lotus did pretty well and came second, but it was Ferrari who triumphed.

So what has this history lesson to do with the current shenanigans in Paris? Well, it seems that even though he warned them, the technical working group that defined the regulations for this season, ignored Ross Brawn and missed an important trick which has unsurprisingly been leapt upon by Brawn, Williams and Toyota. They have used a loophole in the regulations to produce a diffuser that creates much more downforce (thank you Colin) than the opposition, which includes Ferrari, Renault, Red Bull, BMW and Force India. It seems that rather than get on with life and go racing, these teams are now using the FIA to resolve their disagreements. Surely if the components have been deemed legal in two races by two sets of stewards, then there can't be any case to answer?

Of course the foregoing logic reckons without Ferrari, who are proclaimed in interviews given by the FIA Presdient, as being the most important team in Formula 1. Of course then if Ferrari shouts, the FIA must jump and jump they have.

As I write there is no verdict but we now face the prospect of the winners of the first two races and leaders of the championship being excluded together with those two other teams. About the only consolation, in the event that the teams ore disqualified, is that Ferrari won't actually benefit because they've been so laughably poor they've failed to score a point yet. Indeed their lawyer a Mr. Tozzi has accussed Ross Brawn, who in a previous life was the driving force behind Ferrari's success, of being "supremely arrogant". A trait, I suggest, not totally unfamiliar to the entire Ferrari organisation.

Going back to 1977, what have we lost? Sportsmanship. What have we gained? Manipulation and backbiting.

Sad isn't it?

Darling Alistair's Scotland

Who said: "XXXXXXXX is in a unique position, by virtue of its size and financial strength, to provide support to XXXXXXXXX, and we regard it as both responsible and commercially beneficial to undertake this transaction."? You could be mistaken if you think you’ve heard it before but for me it’s another example of this government’s sheer stupidity (or is it cupidity?). A failed building society has been rescued with taxpayer’s money, albeit they’ve cleverly wrapped it up as “support” to a beneficial takeover.

I’m not talking here about LloydsTSB and its taking over of HBOS (that’s Halifax Bank of Scotland). Nope I’m remarking on the latest wheeze from the Scottish gang; that of the support given to Nationwide Building Society in the takeover (read rescue) of the Dunfermline Building Society, which apparently suddenly discovered it had losses of £24milion! I can see this must have been a surprise in a company that “even in good times” only cleared £6million profit in any one year. The quote was Graham Beale, the Chief Executive of Nationwide Building Society.

To be clear, I’m sure the good folk of Dunfirmline and its surrounding parts are genuinely shocked, worried and indeed horrified at the thought of losing their homes, and indeed it would be churlish, under normal circumstances to wish them ill. However let’s look at these rescue deals geographically shall we?

Royal Bank of Scotland, now, this has been taken over by the taxpayer after having made the biggest loss in British corporate history. Then we have that LloydsTSB (now Lloyds Group) takeover of HBOS, brokered by Gordo who broke his own fiscal policy in order to make this happen. The link here of course is that HBOS is an acronym for Halifax Bank of Scotland. You might have spotted that too. And now we have the Dunfermline (which is in Scotland) Building Society. Of course we had Northern Rock, which is based in the English part of the United Kingdom so its rescue package at least could be seen to balance the argument, until you see in whose constituency the head office is located. Yep Jim Cousins, a labour MP.

I know I may be running the risk of being a Murray Walker here but I can’t help thinking that if the failed businesses were called “Bank of Surrey” or “Mansions R Us (Hampshire) Building Society” then the rescue deals would have been less forthcoming. However Gordon the Clown and his team know which side their bread is buttered, thus I recommend that every financial institute or business in the UK changes its registered name so the words “of Scotland” appear somewhere, thereby guaranteeing that every taxpayer in the UK underwrites the business.

Horrified of Doha

The news that BA and other airlines will be reporting losses this year comes as no surprise. Indeed the recession/depression in world markets must surely impact tourism and therefore the travel plans of many people. Here in Doha I have noticed a slow-down in the new construction projects such as the Shangri La hotel and the Marriott Garden, both of which book end the City Centre shopping mall. Likewise I’m told things are progressing slowly at the Hilton which is close to my home. If evidence were needed that the travel industry is suffering, there it is.
However, many of us still need to travel and that means we need to get on a plane. Just such a circumstance arose over the weekend. Having had some issues in my racing car the previous weekend we decided to make a few changes and then get some track time in. This means testing on a non race day. Looking at the calendar it seems a good day would be 8th May at Silverstone so having confirmed it with the team I set about booking flights etc.

This is where I believe BA has targeted me in an effort to reduce those losses of which we spoke earlier! Apparently to travel from Doha to LHR on a Thursday evening and return on the following Saturday morning costs twice as much as the same flights but four days apart! Having looked around for alternatives it seems there’s no flights that meet the timing so either I book it or look at alternative dates.

Seems to this simple person that this kind of pricing is exactly why BA and others of that ilk are suffering. Time for a rethink perhaps?

Brawn displays brains.

Good to see that the revived Honda team is showing what its potential really was. With Button and Barrichello they have two good drivers and now a car that, based upon the limited testing, and yesterday’s qualifying, is equally good. Protests about the interpretation of the rear diffusers may have created a bit of intrigue but ultimately the three teams (including Williams and Toyota) have shown that by using their brains they’ve created a sea change in the Formula One Championship and let’s hope it lasts. Going back some years; it was 1977 when Colin Chapman produced his first “wing” car, the Lotus 78 which used airflow to suck the car down to the track surface, and it seems to me that these teams are reflecting that same spirit of ingenuous design approach.

Unfortunately I’m at work so cannot watch the race but I sincerely hope the result reflects qualifying because if ever a team deserved a debut win its one that has shown such fighting spirit.

How much longer do we have to put up with this?

Can we just take a few minutes to reflect on what is happening here? I refer to the foot stamping tantrums of the ruling classes, by which I mean Gordo the Clown and his chums, Alistair and Hazza. What I’m worried about and indeed it would appear I’m not alone in this, is the thinking behind this outpouring of anger over the Fred Goodwin pension. It isn’t going away and I guess I’m not helping here but the point is that if you make a deal, just because you subsequently don’t like it, doesn’t mean you should change it.

There are wider, much wider and scarier implications here. We all make a deal with our government no matter which country, which generally involves an agreement to abide by the laws of the land, pay whatever taxes are imposed and behave in a responsible manner when taking advantage of the facilities offered by the country. It is a two way bargain, because having signed up for it, the Government of the day, must maintain a consistency in its approach to matters of public importance, law and trade etc. What is scary here is that this government appears to think that just because it doesn’t like the laws which affect the bargain it made with Fred Goodwin; it can just change those laws in order to get its own back. A touch of the playground bully there; and of course as with all playground bullies, they are scary not because they are tough, but because they are unpredictable. With a playground bully you never know if you’ll keep your dinner money because it’s been stolen from your mate or today it will be filched from your pocket as protection money.

If, as this government has demonstrated on previous occasions, it does push through a law in this case in order to obtain Sir Fred’s pension then presumably that law will apply to anyone, simply because you can’t make laws personal, they apply to the land. Therefore anyone who is currently saving for their future (although here I’m unsure as to what the efficacy of such action may be at this time) is fair game to have it stolen from them by Gordo the Clown and his previously mentioned mates.

Then there’s taxation. Some people live in regimes where taxation is applied to funds that are earned in the home country and not to funds earned in overseas locations. It is a source of constant envy for folks who can’t live/move abroad, that those who can are benefitting from what is assumed to be a “tax free” existence. Time to clarify a few things here before I come to the point: First if you are a Brit working abroad and you are registered as overseas then you can’t go home for longer than 90 days per year, if you do, you pay the tax on all of the earnings you accrued that year. Second if you wish to return at some point you continue your social security (we call it National Insurance) contributions, whilst overseas, but because you aren’t actually using the facilities, you get to pay a reduced sum. Third if you own a home in the UK you pay all the taxes and levies applicable to that home and in this case it is unchanged, whether you are at home or not.

I realise that this may not apply to other countries, in particular the USA but it is the current status in the UK. However, and this is another scary thing, it appears that Gordo has a further terrific wheeze. He’s apparently suggested to the other EU members that it would be good to grab the taxes on those expat funds because they deserve to be fleeced even though as above they’ve worked hard and suffered in return an inability to enjoy life at home. I’m sure many will not sympathise with the last point but the former is real and thus deserves some consideration.

However in his greed he ignores the financial boost the economy gets from expats who generally return their income to their home shores. Offshore accounts are OK but they are restrictive. These funds in turn help the institutions by way of investment and therefore are an unseen but very significant contribution to the economy. But if they are subject to taxation, there is no need to send them home, better to place them in the offshore accounts where the offshore country benefits instead. Good isn’t it?

But what about that taxation thing? It is clear that when the dust settles there will need to be a reckoning and there can be no doubt that the burden of that reckoning will fall upon those who are working, therefore earning wages and thus paying taxes. Indeed, as is the norm, anyone who is working in a higher paid position will be taxed at a higher level. The problem comes with what the higher level means. Is it the factory worker who is paid a minimum wage but then gets more money because of the effort he/she has put in? If so then where is the incentive for that worker to improve? Or is it the executive who is earning because he/she is bringing business and therefore trade to the country? I suspect the targets will be the latter and the former will be forgotten in the rush to villify those who are perceived to be better off. Sadly the worker who has made such an effort and is making a similar contribution to the country’s purse will be disheartened and the country will lose. The executive will probably just up sticks and move abroad in a repeat of the 1960’s “brain drain”.

Soooooooooo, bearing all of the above in mind, I wonder what the requirements are for Antartic Citizenship?

Give it back it's mine!

Solemmegetthisright. In twelve years of government the Labour Party or at the minimum Gordon the slayer and his mates have sold all the UK’s reserves, stolen savers money to pay for it, then encouraged financial profligacy to the extent that we are now in the worst position to weather a storm that any country other than Iceland (Is that a country) can be in. This is backed up by statements from the Financial Services Authority and the Governor of the Bank of England.

But wait, the answer to our problem comes in a flash. Sir Fred Goodwin, friend of the stars (or Gordo the Clown anyway) has over the years amassed a tidy pension and as such he must give it back. Oh yes, says Darling Alistair. He, that man over there (you can almost see the ugly sister wig and the dress), he is the one who has caused us all this bother by bringing the pride of Scotland RBS down . (Oh no he isn't comes the audience reply). It was he who told Gordon that it was ok and things really were going to get better. But he lied and so we must punish him. Oh no he didn't we in the audience r................ enough of the pantomime stuff!

All of this ignores the fact that Sir Fred who may very well deserve a fair old thrashing behind the bike sheds for losing our tuck money, has probably shipped his dosh to the Cayman Islands or elsewhere and if Al baby wants it back, he’d better beg that island’s regime for it, ‘cos sure as God made little green apples, Fred won’t be giving it back.

Funniest moment of the day? On being asked if he knew what sir Fred thought of his wheeze, Alistair’s reply was, “he hasn’t answered yet.” Let's face it Alistair and Gordon, I suspect whatever answer comes back at least one of the words will be “off”.

Which, coincidently is the answer I'd no doubt get if I asked the government to give back my savings, but then again I'm not stupid enough to ask in the first place.

A Traveler's Tale

Flying. Something we generally can’t do without an airline and a ticket. Not strictly true because we can leap from tall buildings, or we can fall off large lumps of the scenery. This activity is however more accurately known as plummeting (almost always to our death).

But flying from one place to another is pretty normal. So much so that going to the airport has taken on the significance of a trip to the local railway station. Terminal 5 at Heathrow is one such "railway station". It came in for some serious stick when it opened but the opening was driven by BA's desire to showcase its new home in time for the Easter traffic. A strategic error of vast proportions.

I have no problem with T5 which (and I remember when that opened too) like T4, works. Indeed the other day I was pleased to discover that after around fifteen years, I am elevated to executive level and can use the BA Gallery Lounge. Good stuff, mainly because in there I can get really good bacon rolls chased down with good coffee, so that as I headed off to this desert of pork that is Qatar I need not pine for the delights of the bacon roll. I’m not back for a month so I took advantage. That’ll be soup for the rest of the week then.

But back to this flying thing.

I wrote this as we traversed the skies on BA 125 LHR - DOH via BAH to use the airline codes. I generally use the premium economy service, because it’s cheaper than club and you get more legroom than coach so I can sllep on the way home. I’ve been doing this for over a year now hence my elevation to that coveted class of lounge lizards, er sorry, lounge accessees.

But forgetting the delights of that lounge it may be worth touching on the in flight entertainment. And here I stress it is not those moments when a cabin bag falls from an overhead locker on to an unsuspecting passenger although this is always entertaining. Nope I write about the excellent movies that we get to see these days. On a trip last April I watched No Country For Old Men, a truly marvellous dark thriller.

This time I watched “A Bunch Of Amateurs”, one of those Brit movies where the lead is understated and absolutely must be seen to be the fall guy. Brit movies have to do this. Casting Burt Reynolds in the lead represents a stroke of genious because he may be considered a) a has been actor and b) he's got a good sense of humour. In it our hero (Burt) arrives at Stratford but not (as he expected) Stratford Upon Avon, to play King Lear. His transformation from overbearing, egotistical, uncooprative movie superstar, to compliant but critically acclaimed stage actor is well played and the surrounding cast is more than worthy of credit. See it, you won’t be disappointed.

Then as we passed through the skies over Iraq, and after I passed another bottle of red wine, I surfed through the entertaiment system and found Beck “Modern Guilt”. Quirky as ever but good to hear.

So, having enjoyed the hospitality and the entertainment package, not to mention the bacon rolls and coffee in the lounge, I can face the next period of my exile in Qatar safe in the knowledge that BA will whisk me back home in time for my first race of the season at Snetterton in March.

Doppio Espresso and a Bacon Sandwich please.

Sandwiches

Oops I’ve just eaten mine. About an hour before lunch and all I have left to look forward to is an apple.

But, if I were in the good old UK I’d probably leap into my gas guzzling 4x4 and head up to Bob’s Bites in Stourbridge. I’d be heading there, all 60 miles of the journey, because according to the AA (Automobile Association), this is where one can obtain the best bacon sandwich in the UK.

But alas I’m not in the UK and although I have a gas guzzling 4x4 it would take more than a few hours to get to Bob’s bacon butty emporium so I’m stuck, waiting for that apple and fruit drink.

Sometimes I can agree with manipulating operators.

In a spark of enlightenment (or maybe he’s just realised that his job is on the line), Peter Mandelson has leapt to the defence of the British economy. In doing so, he hasn’t attempted to do what his Prime Minister has attempted, and tried to blame the US of A. Nor has he used the old “it’s a global thing” thing. Nope, Mandy has gone for the jugular and responded to the criticisms of Howard Schulz, the boss of coffee chain Starbucks, by suggesting in a suitably British way, that perhaps Mr. Schulz should protect his glass house before lobbing bits of the scenery at someone else.

Mr. Schulz was asked by an interviewer for his views on the European economy and although he, like many of us, expressed concern, his turn of phrase was somewhat disingenuous. Having stated that “Western Europe” is a concern for his business, he went on to suggest that the British economy was in a “spiral”.

Enter SuperMandy, who in a robust riposte, suggested that Mr. Schulz was less than qualified to comment on the British economy when his own business was evaporating faster than a snowball in a pizza oven.

Good stuff, we need more of this.

Now this is a bit scary.

Reported in the Telegraph today, the government is planning to exercise a veto on the bonuses issued by the “rescued” banks. The story is here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/4640786/Government-to-veto-bonuses-at-bailed-out-banks.html ". I find this deeply disturbing, not from the moral issue of giving rewards for failure, although this is what the Labour government has been doing with its MPs and ministers since 1997.

No, the problem here is nationalisation and micro management. Perhaps it would be wise to ask exactly who wanted to take the banks over. In the case of Lloyds Group it was arguably as a result of the Gordon Brown rescue deal that a stable and somewhat boring bank moved into rescue territory. Had they not been frog marched down the aisle to a shotgun wedding I’m certain they’d be in better shape than Barclays. But no, advised by a senior board member of Standard Chartered Bank (I wonder why a competitor would do this?) Gordon worked the deal to rescue HBOS.

Let’s just ponder that competitor thing though. A senior member of the board of Standard Chartered is credited with coming up with the government’s world domination, sorry finance rescue plan. In doing so it managed to remove at least one if not two serious competitors from the battlefield. Does anyone really think Gordon didn’t know this? Of course I could understand Alistair not seeing it, his head is so far up his own ego, he wouldn’t see a runaway train even if it hit him. But Gordon did know this and removed any official obstacles to the “marriage.”

The result of all this is that Lloyds who are a retail/high street bank have been tarred with the same brush as RBS, an aggressive retail and (this is the important bit) investment bank, that took itself to the wall due to its aggression (greed?). Clearly there is a need to differentiate here. Whilst I don’t buy the sob story put out by Lloyds that says their staff are deserving and low paid and rely on bonuses to top up that low pay, there is a need for perspective. RBS has received substantial sums because all on its own it ran aground and being Scottish, Gordon (a Scot by the way) has to be very keen to make sure Scotland receives support from the many English and Welsh taxpayers. Hence when RBS announces a billion pounds of bonuses he, rather embarrassingly so, has to do something.

But, as we know Lloyds is talking of relatively modest sums here. Not for them the “fat cat” numbers but a comparatively reasonable £120m to be spread all over its staff base. In very many cases this will equate to a bonus of hundreds, not thousands, not millions, of pounds.

But nationalisation, there I’ve said it, nationalisation as imposed by Gordon or perhaps that should be Standard Chartered Bank, means that they’ll be controlled to the point that lower tier individuals must suffer. Not only is this nationalisation, it is governmental bullying in the extreme. And perhaps because Gordon realises his fate, he doesn’t care that those people may well be labour voters.

The whole thing stinks I’m afraid.

Of course the foregoing is being controlled by UK Financial Investments, a government department set up specifically to monitor and watch the banks.

And now America its your turn:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4641959/Barack-Obama-appoints-team-to-save-car-industry.html". Seems frighteningly familiar don't you think?

Of Bankers, Flying and the Mini.

Where’s my bonus then?
I’m sorry but this just won’t do. I’ve spent the past 16 months working out of an office in the middle of a major energy facility in the Middle East, with nothing but 20,000, workers and a few camels for company. Yet, when the word “bonus” is mentioned all I get is an eerie silence. Well come on perlease, if I was a banker, that’s Banker, I’d be here now sipping champers and waving a big fat cheque around. Regardless of the fact that along with my mate Gordon Bruin and his Darling, I‘ve run the UK into the financial quicksand.

But no! Alas and alak, I’m an honest expat (make your own minds up then) who sends his hard earned money back to Lloyds Group (sorry that should be Bank of NuLabour) every month, in order to finance the lifestyles of a bunch of bankers! You can make your own mind up about my spelling there too.

Flying Visits
Old BoJo got it about right when he suggested that the new runway at Heathrow was just about the worst thing Gordon and his mates could do. Well he meant “as far as the country is concerned.” Because clearly in an effort to de-populate a non labour constituency Gordon is quite happy to make this runway happen – for the Government.

However let’s consider the alternatives:

Heathrow is ideally placed for those of us who live to the West, South or North West of London. Gatwick is ideal for those on the South and South East. How about moving flights from one to the other and linking the whole with a monorail? Good Idea methinks because we already have a corridor (the M25 Car Park) and thus a right of way, whereby we could run our monorail service above the commuters in the car park below and therefore reduce the emphasis on Heathrow. Good stuff really and certainly a challenge. It would probably take a lot less time than building an entirely new airport.

But what about this proposal from BoJo concerning the Thames Estuary?
In Japan there is Kansai, an airport that was built on a man made Island near Osaka. This was done for two main reasons, the first being the need to cut down noise in a built up area and the second because Osaka needed to expand. Can you see where this is going?

The UK has a long tradition of engineering excellence and no matter what the naysayers will argue; it is still a major player in that arena. Take the Waterloo Chunnel Terminal. The general public doesn’t know the half of that particular story but I can tell you from personal experience, it was a major feat of construction engineering, not least that superstructure design, which in itself is impressive.
So, BoJo’s idea is to utilise our engineering expertise and build a man made island in the Thames Estuary and that, my friends, is where Terminal 5 and all the other terminals, passenger airbridges etc. may be relocated. We could then use the Waterloo Eurotunnel Terminal (well all that stuff has moved to St Pancras now) for checking in, and then travel by rail to our offshore departure point. Heathrow could be developed into the home of British Motorsport and be given the British GP! Hooray!

I commend this kind of thinking (Boris' that is) because even though it may well take a further fifteeen years to come to fruition, it certainly won’t matter because let’s face it; nobody can afford to fly anymore due to NuLabour’s moneygrabbing!

Cowley

I read that the unions are suggesting that the government should encourage people to buy cars so that the workers at Cowley can keep their jobs.

I rather enjoyed this quote from the Electronic Telegraph, “A Mini spokesperson confirmed that the company had held discussions with Unite union representatives over changes to shift patterns at the plant.” I’m trying to imagine if there is an anti height discrimination policy at BMW.

However as much as I am genuinely saddened by the plight of the workforce, who undoubtedly have worked hard and earned BMW substantial sums on car sales, they along with the rest of us, have been placed into an uncertain future by NuLabour and the seeds of this were sown in 1999. If things are only just happening now then we’ve been pretty bloody lucky.

But, who says these workers are more deserving of support than the construction workers or the truck drivers or anyone, who sadly will also suffer due to the wanton destruction of the British economy?

Ethical Eating?

I’ve got this mate. No, really I do have mates. Anyway, this mate who is a genuinely nice guy, is a touchy, feely, the world needs help, kind of bloke. Ergo anything that he sees and which to him is either contrary to human or animal rights or indeed against anything he believes in, he goes for the throat. This week’s victim is Tesco.

In the past we’ve had the iniquities of Gitmo, where, in quoting the Geneva Convention, he conveniently forgot that that august and indeed worthy document, also forbids acts of war where the protagonists do not announce said war until they take action (this is terrorism by the way). Anyway, my mate now thinks that Tesco is right up there with G Dubbya.

Why, you may ask, is this UK retailer, a purveyor of reasonably priced comestibles, a target for my friend’s angst? Well, apparently they don’t treat their chickens very nicely. Chickens, let’s just ponder that thought. You may think otherwise but in my opinion, your average chicken eats, sleeps, crows, lays eggs if that way inclined and finally croaks in blissful ignorance. Not for your average, or indeed your intellectually superior chicken, is the problem of finding the money for the mortgage or to feed the family, although Enid Blyton and her ilk would have you thinking differently. Nor, surprisingly will you find a chicken voting for Gordon Brown………………………. Although here I may be very, very wrong.

So my mate reckons that Tesco has developed a system of analysing your Tesco Clubcard records (for those who are unaware, this is a card whereby you spend money and get discount points against purchases, similar to Airmiles) and they, Tesco, assess from this info, what we or indeed you, want to buy, and then concentrate their efforts in that direction. Well, apart from the absolute shock and indeed horror, that hit me when this was pointed out, I must say that it seems eminently suitable. I mean if I want to buy caviar and pate du fois gras, I go to Harrods or if really pushed, Selfridges. I don’t go to Tesco.

However, if I want to buy booze, reasonably priced food, such as leg of lamb, chicken, a bit of beef etc. I go to Tesco or Sainsbury etc. So what? But there’s more. Apparently in order to maximise their profits, Tesco have noted from the Clubcard records that loads of peeps are buying chicken. Well, even in my dotage here I understand that. Chicken has always been comparatively cheap so what’s new? Indeed Tesco have made sure they get cheap chicken by concentrating their purchasing efforts on those farms/plants that treat the chicken less than “ethically”. Hmm, I’m not sure how you treat a chicken ethically but there you go. Anyway, my mate has decided that we should all return our Tesco cards so that they stop treating chickens badly.

There is of course a corollary. Many people go to Tesco because they do look at what people are buying and therefore get a better deal on their purchasing. This does two things in that it maintains Tesco’s profits and more importantly it makes sure that those reasonable prices stay reasonable so those who really can’t afford Pate du Fois Gras can still eat! Unfortunately it seems my mate wants those who can’t afford to eat beef every week, to starve. Is this ethical?

Motor Sport?

Motor sport is one of the most tiresome subjects anyone can mention in polite company. Just mention the word to an environmentalist and you’ll be pinned to the wall whilst being berated about the planet and the ethical irresponsibility of burning fossil fuels in the pursuit of enjoyment, or you’ll be nailed by the NIMBYs for making too much noise, or you’ll be marked as a heartless brute for taking a genuine classic car and turning it into a racing machine. These are just some of the reactions a motor sport enthusiast can expect; there are other reactions like “huh?”

Well the fact is that many people are employed in the world of motor sport; in accessory shops, engineering companies, preparation shops, circuit owners, and the list goes on. Yet the general public knows or even understands very little about it. Of course they’re not going to learn much more from this either!

However, there are a few things that I’m currently thinking about as I sit here in a country where the weather is generally dry and they have races at night instead of at civilised hours during the day.

The first is the British GP. I confess to liking Silverstone and indeed I used to enjoy visiting, on alternate years, Brands Hatch. The two circuits presented differing challenges both for the spectator, who would spend many hours looking at the rear end of the car in front, one year in Kent and the next in Northants and the drivers, who would either have to deal with the flat out nature of the airfield or the dips, bumps and lumps provided by the Kent “bowl”. All that alternation came to an end in 1986(?) when Silverstone were awarded the contract for the British GP for 10 years; this also coincided with the beginning of the NIMBY issue at Brands, where race days on the GP circuit would be severely restricted. Now, thanks to a spat with the BRDC, Bernie E has taken his ball away and given it to Donington.

Donington is a historically important motor sport venue having held Grand Eprueves (that’s an old name for them) in the late thirties. Indeed it deserves its place in history as much as Brands or Silverstone, but in order to bring it up to the necessary standards it is being re developed. This will involve considerable work from the designers to the contractors. Reports suggest that planning permission has been granted and therefore the work may commence. We can view the plans on line and indeed I have seen it and it is good. But, and here is my problem, I just can’t see that all the work and the infrastructure changes needed for the event will be in place by July 2010! This is being discussed at http://www.ten-tenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107962. I’ll no doubt come back to this at some point.

Then there’s historic motor sport. This really confuses me. There are various regulations to cover differing types of car and periods under which those cars raced. This was originally decided by the FIA (we all know who they are) and the most popular is what is termed Appendix K. This set of regs is applied to saloon and sports cars built in sufficient numbers to be homologated (you can look that up for yourselves), for motor sport. In the case of Pre 1966 saloons it was Group 2 racing. Now, here’s the catch. There are many people in this class of racing who are racers; there are also many who are rich. Put those two together and you’ll find that the rich racers win. This is not strange, nor is it unusual, it is simply normality. Competition breeds success, if you have the dosh. It does mean however that those of us with less than the odd million quid, have to make do with picking up the results as and when we can. Personally I don’t mind this but then at my age I’ve probably got as many laurels and winners pots as I’m likely to get (and I’m pleased to say I have a few).

However I do get really fed up with the petty jealousy arising from those who want to march out of step with the rest. The criticism of the Masters Racing Organisation in the UK by some racers is a little rude to say the least. In a nutshell Masters have taken historic motor sport and decided to make it a more user friendly experience for their customers, who, surprise, surprise, are the entrants. Not the spectators, not the circuit owners, nope it’s us the drivers. My confusion revolves around this anti Masters thing. It seems that those who are railing against Masters are those who think that cheating or rule bending doesn’t happen in other clubs or organisations. Well it does, it may be that those clubs make the correction of these things more visible and/or like the HSCC, run a tight ship, but it does happen all over. People need to realise that cheats generally only fool themselves. Using that as an excuse not to race is, I feel, somewhat self defeating.

Politicians or thieves?

Is it a prerequisite that these days, to become a leading politician all you have to be able to do is smile, use an autocue and present yourself by using soundbites?

Tony Blair was, in my humble opinion, the first to do this, but since then we have Barak Obama, arguably the most powerful man in the world, who in the space of three weeks has enacted the predictable (the closure of Gitmo) and wholly failed to deliver anything but wholesale panic on to the world's financial markets.

But he's not alone. Oh no, Blair, as mentioned above, took it upon himself to change the way we relate to politicians. All of a sudden here were people who we could trust. They smiled, they were enjoying serving us the public, they looked us straight in the eye.......................... and stole our savings.

Yes folks the Nulabour experiment was just that an exercise in daylight robbery. Why does anyone think that the banks on their own are the cause of the current seriously harmful recession? Certainly they, the banks, promulgated the situation but without the complicity of the various governments around the world, those feckless and unemployable borrowers whose motto was "can't pay, won't pay", would never have been given what eventually turns out to be yours and my savings. They'd have been laughed out of the bank/building society. But, and it surely must be so, the banks had no option but to take on these loans, because like the rest of us, they (certainly in the UK) were being screwed by the state to provide more funds, via taxation, levies and general governmental arm twisting and thus it was necessary to show profits based upon sheer fiction.

Are the banks at fault? Definitely but ultimately I blame Lord Tone and his pals, and now America, whilst the events have happened, your Mr Obama is about to sink you too.

Tourism and the developing world

So let's consider what we want here. We want tourism and the international recognition that it brings (not to mention the money). How are we to achieve this?

Let's look at our assets.

Hmm, we have an airport but it needs upgrading, we have some luxury hotels but let's build more. We have lots of beaches but we don't allow public bathing so we'll give them to the hotels.

We can put all these things into place and we'll have them flocking to see ............................. Ah yes here's the snag, we don't actually have anything to see, other than sand, a few camels, those hotels etc.

Well the airport is coming along slowly but nicely, the hotels, ditto.

I wait to see the outcome.