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.