Twonk Watch.

I don't do this blogging thing very much as you can see, but I have to say that this particular story has prompted me.  It's not new, it's not even a fresh view.  This is just dispair.

You see this ex MP, has basically said "It's not my fault, I was told to do it".  Of course those who allegedly told him are denying the whole thing.   Fervently.

But the sad thing here, for me is not the fact that someone has done wrong.  It's the fact, and it is a fact, that this piece of excrement who purported to be a leading member of society, hasn't got the strength of character to stand up and say "I was wrong".  He, like Gordon "it was America's fault" Brown, is just one more cowardly and miserably coniving piece of dog poo.

Oh, and I consider Lord Taylor to be just as reprehensible.

Prompted by something on Twitter

Prompted by something on Twitter, my reply was Brit embassies are fucking useless.  Here’s why.

What follows is not totally factual but reflects the feeling that one gets, as an expat, in countries like Qatar.  Qatar is Islamic, it works on the Sharia Law, it has a Civil Code but unless you are a member of the Royal Family that means nothing.

So, here you are; you want/need to replace your passport.  You go to the embassy and speak to a very English gentleman.

“Hi, I need to renew my passport because it’s full, it hasn’t expired so can you point me in the right direction please?”

“Have you downloaded the form?”

“Er, yes from the FCO website.”

“Ah, good.  Send it to Dusseldorf.”

“Um, I’m here in Qatar and of course I need my passport for work so it would be really good if you could renew it for me.”

Sharp intake of breath. “Oh no, we don’t do that.”

“Hmm, so why do I have to send it to Dusseldorf?”

“Well we decided that looking after the petty beaurocracy associated with passport renewal was, well, somewhat tedious.  So now we tell people to send their requests to Dusseldorf.”

“But I’m British and it is a British passport!”

“And?”

“Ok, accepting the passport situation, can you tell me what you’d do if I was arrested for say, chewing gum in public during Ramadan?”

“Probably ignore it.”

“Sorry?”

“Well, you’ve come here to work so you obviously know the laws, so why should we worry?  Do you chew gum by the way?”

“No.” 

“Well then what are you worried about?”

Taking another tack.  “Well then, if I were to have a serious accident which subsequently proved fatal, would the Embassy arrange the repatriation of my body and keep my family informed?”

“Are you insured?”

“Well yes.”

“Nope.”

“Er, you are here to look after the British expats aren’t you?”

“Oh, good lord no.  We’re here to look after British interests.  That means we arrange trips for local dignitaries to the UK where they can buy up businesses, spend their cash on various entertainments and generally have a good time.  

As to you, I suggest you go to DHL and send off that passport before you are jailed as an illegal.”

Labour Hypocrisy Pt2 the follow up.......

Just to make things clear, my point yesterday concerned a Labour supporter's view that an alleged breach of the 1998 Data Protection Act, by the Government, was equal to the opposition questioning the government's crime statistics.  I was prompted to reconsider my position by a comment on the blog post, so to set the record straight.

Thecrime statistics quoted by Chris Grayling MP in February and at the time so vociferously refuted by; not only the UK Statistics Office but of course the Labour government, were found to be closer to the truth.  See this report.  I am therefore led to believe that Labour supporters must condone the alleged breach of a statute and at the same time must be completely blind to the obvious increase in crime.

Labour Hypocrisy

I was not really surprised at the assertion of a Labour supporter on Twitter, that the following two posters reproduced from The Straight Choice were considered  "Frankly Disgraceful", yet when I suggested to her that Labour's cancer mail shot which can only have resulted from using protected data (probably medical records) was pretty diabolical, the resulting silence was........................ er deafening.

I do of course refer to s7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (1998 c 29) wherein an individual is entitled to be informed of the circumstances of where and to whom his or her data is being disclosed.

So whilst the posters may be distasteful they are not illegal.  However identifying cancer sufferers from medical records (unless it was a massive lucky guess) is a contravention of the 1998 Act.  I'd almost recommend those people who were targeted by Labour's disgraceful action, take their case to the European Court of Human rights.

No matter what happens in the General Election the despicable ingrates who perpetrated this opportunist electioneering scam should be locked up.

---

Tweet others as you would tweet yourself

As Stewart Mclennan has discovered it's not what you tweet its how you tweet it.  Its all a question of context.

Had he not been the Labour Party's candidate for Moray, nobody would have cared about his extremely rude and ignorant tweets.  However he was that party's man and he was plain daft. As a result many people are looking at what they tap into their keyboards and making sure it doesn't cause problems.  But its not that easy.

I've been involved in a major contractual litigation, which resulted in my being cross examined under oath by one of the UK's leading Barristers.  Clearly, other than to explain my absence from various tweetups etc. I've mentioned nothing about the case, however it has resulted in a lot of air travel between my work location and the UK and because I've been in London, I obviously took the chance to attend one or two of my favourite pubs.

The first question I encountered in the witness box after the affirmation was "Did you enjoy your pint of Young's Special last night?".  This was a reference to a tweet that I had sent at around 7:30pm.  It was not actually a surprise because I'd noticed the opposition's solicitors had been browsing my linked in profile over the previous week or so.  However it was a surprise that he'd open up with that.   His next one was quite interesting.  He quoted a post from a week before which went "Before criticizing someone take a walk in their shoes, then when you do you'll be a mile away and you have their shoes."  Missing out the second half he asked me if I wrote it.  Yes, I said, "And is that how you treated my clients in your dealings with them?" or words to that effect. Of course there's no answer to that because he'd taken the post completely out of context.  I just suggested it was a good way of working.  Then we carried on for approximately four hours.

So, in my case it wasn't anything bad just how it was used against me for other purposes.  This is where I think Iain Dale the political blogger is coming from when he suggest that all tweets of the party activists should be reviewed.  Its not that people cannot be trusted indeed other than the complete idiots such as our ex Labour Party candidate, people will just tweet good stuff.  But as I've demonstrated above, these things can and will be used against you.

Of course it also beggars belief that leading members of the Labour party were reading Mr McLennan's tweets, yet did nothing about it.  Perhaps they shared his views?

ET Phone home

So here's the deal.  You're a grown man living in the modern world.  A world that you've seen change a few times admittedly, but still here you are.  Trouble is you're the leader of the political party that is actually governing one of the most strategically important countries in the world.  As leader of that party you are also the leader of that country and you've spent the past three years effectively blaming the rest of the world for making your life difficult.  On top of that, you've sold off all of that country's gold reserves.  But it doesn't stop there.

You are called to an enquiry to explain why the army that your then leader sent to a foreign land to fight for oil,  you didn't give them the necessary cash to buy the proper equipment.  Your explanation is that nobody told you it was a problem and you increased the budget anyway. To use a well worn phrase, tell that to the army.

So you are coming to the end of your tenure and an election is near, although only you can call it and so far you've missed two opportunities.  In fact today you are in Afghanistan to see those troops you mentioned yesterday as having all the equipment their generals said they needed.  Then today on twitter, we are told that you've given an interview to the Tesco magazine about your mother.

Now if very sadly your mother is no longer with us, I offer my condolences.  However with us or not, what do you take us, the voters, for?  Do you really think we are daft enough to believe that the perpetrator (or should that be perpeTRAITOR) of the acts of selling England by the pound, killing our soldiers by reducing funding and wasting the country's remaining funds on saving the banks (which as we knew then was totally unnecessary), has actually got a semblance of heart.

Well, I'm sure you do but as the doyen of afternoon TV would say.  Goodbye Gordon Brown, you are the weakest link.  And I would add that if you had a semblance of backbone you walk now.

Brown's Britain 2015 and even the Queen has fled

Dateline: London, March 1, 2015


The State of Emergency introduced in May 2010 is to be extended for another five years, Prime Minister-for-Life Gordon Brown announced in London yesterday.

Such was the scale of the crisis facing the country that a General Election could only lead to instability.

Labour would continue in power indefinitely, Brown pledged. He was getting on with the job, taking the difficult decisions, which is what people wanted him to do.

This was no time for a novice, the Prime Minister-for-Life insisted. The people had spoken when they rejected the Etonian salesman Cameron in May 2010. There was no need for a fresh mandate.

Even though the Conservatives won the popular vote and became the largest party at Westminster, they failed to secure an overall majority in the Commons, as a result of boundary changes introduced by Labour.

For almost a week after the results were declared, Brown refused to leave Number 10 Downing Street. The only evidence that someone was still inside was the fusillade of mobile phones and computer keyboards being thrown out of the windows.

Eventually, he put out a deranged statement on YouTube in which he blamed the election result on the low turn-out caused by the worst winter weather in 30 years, which began in America.

When the Queen invited him to the Palace to ask for his resignation, he declined on the grounds that Sarah was washing her hair that day. He was getting on with the job, taking the difficult decisions, which is what people wanted him to do.

Several days later, Brown announced via Twitter that he intended to form a government of national unity. Although his initial overtures to the LibDems to join a coalition were rejected, Nick Clegg relented when Brown promised to introduce a full system of proportional representation during the lifetime of the Parliament.

In his first Budget, the new Chancellor Ed Balls said that Labour planned to increase 'investment' by £100 billion a year to stave off recession, which started in America.

This would include an immediate expansion of the council house building programme to accommodate the ten million extra immigrants expected to arrive in the next decade, as well as hundreds of thousands more unmarried, teenage mothers living on welfare.

As part of an emergency financial package, Britain's remaining gold reserves were sold off to one of those firms which advertise on daytime television, yielding almost £47.50.

Since this fell some way short of the national debt of £2 trillion, further measures were needed. The 'rich' would have to pay their fair share.

The Government announced the top rate of tax was being increased to 110 per cent on all incomes above £50,000, VAT was to rise to 50 per cent and stamp duty would be levied at 33 per cent on all property sales, except caravans and mobile homes belonging to members of the travelling community.

Hedge fund managers and most of the City of London had already decamped abroad to avoid penal rates of taxation.

They were followed in quick succession by thousands of British plumbers and bricklayers, who decided to seek a better life in Poland.

The financial markets went into meltdown. When the pound plunged to parity with the Zimbabwean dollar, the IMF cut off Britain's line of credit.

In a desperate attempt to prevent national insolvency, Balls approached several of those companies, promoted by Carol Vorderman, which promise to consolidate all your loans into one easy monthly payment, even if you have CCJs. But he was turned down flat.

Unemployment rocketed to 25 per cent, except in Newcastle, the North-West, Scotland and Northern Ireland, where nine out of ten people now work for the Government.

Vince Cable resigned from Parliament to become guest host of Strictly Come Dancing, after being overlooked for Chancellor when Balls resigned following a fist fight with Brown, which the Prime Minister-for-Life later denied, saying he'd never hit anyone, honest.

The LibDems left the coalition soon afterwards, when it became apparent Brown had no intention of fulfilling his promise to introduce PR.

After failing to form a new alliance with Sinn Fein, Respect and Nick Griffin (BNP MP for Barking), Brown declared a State of Emergency, under powers drawn up in wartime.

He claimed that he had the authority, since the threat from the economic crisis, which began in America, was at least as great as that posed by the Nazis in 1939, or his name wasn't Winston Churchill.

As Britain was now a full province of the European Union, pursuant to a little-known clause hidden in the small print of the Lisbon Treaty, Parliament was abolished.

That was when Brown declared himself Prime Minister-for-Life. His position was endorsed by the new President-in-Perpetuity of Europe, Lord Mandelson, speaking from his official suite on board a Russian yacht off Corfu.

Protesters who tried to storm Downing Street were repelled by three divisions of the European Defence Force, under the command of an EU Reichsmarschall from the 17th Panzer Division, now garrisoned at Aldershot.

Several attempts by forces loyal to former Prime Minister Tony Blair to mount a leadership coup ended in failure.

Brown said there was no need for anyone to worry that they might lose their seats at the next election, since he had no intention of ever holding one.

After the publication of the Chilcot Inquiry into Iraq, Blair himself was arrested for war crimes as he arrived at Heathrow from Switzerland, where he had moved after his 'non-dom' status in Britain was revoked.

The European Arrest Warrant was executed personally by the new Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Ali Dizaei, who was promoted and awarded £2 million compensation for 'racism' when his prison sentence for corruption was overturned by Lord Chief Justice Keith Vaz.

At the same hearing, Vaz refused to commute a five-year jail sentence given to a 72-year-old pensioner from Walsall, who was caught on CCTV walking her pet labrador without a licence.

The decision was welcomed by the Prime Minister-for-Life, who claimed it was conclusive evidence that his tough law-and-order policies were cutting crime.

Despite the dire financial crisis at home and the collapse of the currency abroad, which had seen petrol rise to £10 a litre (when available), Brown continues to pose as a world statesman.

But his plans to hold a 'global warming' summit in London in January 2012 had to be cancelled because of the continuing bad weather.

That month saw widespread power cuts, following the failure of Britain's last decrepit nuclear power station and record low temperatures, which caused every single one of the 50,000 wind turbines erected across the country to freeze solid, snap in half and fall over.

Six months later, Argentina invaded the Falklands again. This time the Argentines were welcomed with open arms. The islanders were so disillusioned with events back 'home' that they said they were ashamed to be British.

When Brown phoned the White House to ask for help, President Obama refused to take his call, on account of the fact he was playing golf with Tiger Woods.

With the Government distracted by the invasion overseas and by the food riots at home, Bradford, Leicester and Blackburn unilaterally declared that they were now independent Islamic states operating under Sharia law.

The Queen abdicated and moved at the invitation of Lord Ashcroft to Belize, where her neighbours include David Cameron, William Hague and Lord Paul.

In March 2015, the number of British citizens seeking asylum abroad overtook the number of people claiming asylum in Britain.

When Brown's last-ditch application to join the euro was vetoed by Greece, the Tory leader Boris Johnson demanded, from his villa in Turkey, that an immediate General Election should be called.

But speaking to TV's Sir Piers Morgan OBN on Newsnight, the Prime Minister-for-Life wiped away tears and said this was no time for a novice, certainly not another stuck-up Etonian salesman.

He was getting on with the job of saving the world, which is what people wanted him to do. An election would only lead to insanity

United we fall?

Ok, I confess, I like British airways.  There I've said it.  Like someone who is an alcoholic it's seen to be something of a major issue to suggest that British Airways is actually quite good.  But it is.  I've travelled on Singapore, Malaysian, Qatar, Delta, KLM, Air France, Lufthansa, Turkish, Aeroflot et al.  All are quite good (except Delta which has seriously scary cabin staff), but when you climb those steps or walk down that sky gate in New Delhi, Qatar, Moscow, Budapest, you know you're home.

About eighteen months ago I got chatting to a lady who, it transpired, is/was a member of the BA cabin crew.  She'd been visiting Doha on personal business, using the airline perk of 10% fares.  At this time I recall paying around £700.00 for my (Premium Economy) return trip to Doha and she'd paid around £30 (10% of coach class fare).  Not that it worried me in the slightest because although I pay my own fares I get good service and if cabin crew can obtain a good deal as a result of providing such a service then so be it.  Anyway we boarded the aircraft and she was immediately whisked upstairs (a 747) to Club class which seemed a very good deal for £30.00!

So, with the above tale in mind I was somewhat gobsmacked, to say the least when at Christmas the first Unite strike ballot revealed that these people get pretty good salaries.  A purser can earn up to £55k per annum (approximately) and still get those benefits.  For what it's worth there are some very highly qualified individuals in the construction industry, responsible for the safety and welfare of workers, known as construction managers, with university degrees who earn a similar sum but get none of those perks.  I'm not decrying the educational standards of the BA staff nor am I suggesting that they should be treated as lesser individuals than the construction manager types.  But for goodness' sake, this Unite bunch are not only trying to close the airline down they're actually making supporters like me reconsider which airline I travel with.  I can, for instance pay a little more and travel business class with Gulf Air and I'm seriously considering it.  Time for Unite to get real methinks.

I will be sad to see it go but having been jerked around at Christmas, I'm of a mind to not worry if they survive or not.  And another thing.  Gordon Brown stole a major lump of my pension, even before the Government imposed recession, so why should I care if these BA people lose their final salary pensions?  Its the way of the world but contrary to the current Labour idea of fairness, it just proves that life isn't fair.

So, my friends in BA, when you find there's no airline to work for and your pensions are frozen at whatever the selling rate is from the bankruptcy sale you'll really enjoy paying full fare for coach class, if and when you can afford it. 

Win Mo or S60?

I got into PDA's rather late.  My first was a HP 6515c in 2005 and I like that form factor.  Since then I've had a TytnII which frankly still does everything I want it to do.  The problem comes with having a local (Qatari) business sim and of course my UK roaming sim......

Due to a collapse of my old Nokia mobile which carried my UK sim card, I decided to use the opportunity and replace it with a new E72.  This is a report I placed on the forum at Smartphone Daily.

Ok, having had the E72 for a week and played with it I think its time to give an initial report. I've applied a simple score to each important (for me) criteria. You will note that I've weighted each criteria out of ten and then applied a score based upon my personal preference to provide a comparison. From the table below you will see that from a possible 700 the E72 scores 587 whereas the TytnII scores 511.

Criteria/Weight/HTC TytnII/Score/Nokia E72/Score

Battery Life - 8/4/32/10/80
Apps as supplied - 7/7/49/7/49
Ease of Use PIM - 6/7/42/8/48
Screen Resolution
(Daylight) - 9/2/18/10/90
Phone Experience - 10/7/70/10/100
Internet Connectivity - 10/10/100/4/40
Keyboard - 10/10/100/10/100
Ability to leave
laptop @ home - 10/10/100 /8/80

Totals 700/ 511/ 587

On the face of it then the Nokia wins hands down but there's a bit more to it than that.

Over here in Qatar you don't get all inclusive data usage, I pay 10 Riyals per MB which equates to Pst1.80, so you can see that is a very important issue. Sadly the Nokia will not hold on to the Wireless LAN no matter what I do. So the first week has cost me 53 pounds! For a business device I consider this to be an abject failure. I can make it connect but as soon as I ask it to browse/download it defaults to the cell, unless I go offline, which kind of defeats the object of a smartphone.

I think the installed apps are about the same as a Win Mo device, indeed Quickoffice is basically Win Mo lite, thus to produce the kind of reports I do I will need to buy further software. The pre installed maps thing is no better than Google maps so really a waste of space. Overall no different to the TytnII so no absolute advantage here.

I've always maintained that Nokia make the best mobile phones and the E72 is no exception. Easy to dial numbers/input basic contact info. It does well here compared to the TytnII, but the actual contacts and calendar set up is much better on the TytnII hence there's little difference in the score. Messaging is virtually the same on both devices so again no clear advantage.

Screen resolution is far superior on the Nokia.

As to battery life, this has always been an issue with Win Mo which is why we carry spare booster batteries on long journeys. The Nokia lasts at least 48hrs between charges.

Could I leave the laptop at home? Well with the software I've got on the TytnII then yes, but more than that it behaves like a laptop so scores better than the Nokia thus I feel more confident in traveling with the TytnII.

I realise the TytnII is getting long in the tooth but it still stands up to comparison and it does its job very well. In my opinion the E72 doesn't offer a significantly better experience to the extent that I would recommend changing from Win Mo to S60. That said I do like the Nokia as a "lite" business device so it will do for now.

Oh and the OVI thing? Keeps asking for my login and then rejects me so another failure.

Also I suspect the media software on the Nokia is superior to that on the TytnII but I haven't tried it, other than the camera which is very good but not high on my list of priorities.

Burj Khalifa Branded "Pointless" By Germans

Well is it?

In the Middle East, There is generally no business plan involved in building the tallest/longest/deepest structure, it just has to prove you've got money.  This is the reason it was built.  So there is substance to the pointless argument.  American Architect, Samsung C&T of South Korea as the main contractor and "expat" (read Indian, Philipino, Indonesian, etc.) labour.  Let's face it the only local input was money.  It therefore wasn't built to demonstrate the construction prowess of the local community.

All of which means I can't get into the celebration of the building itself, it isn't even particularly pleasant to look at, although tall structures like the Burj Al Arab hotel are, to me, pleasing to the eye.  But from an engineering viewpoint I look forward to the reviews in a couple of years after the initial start up and "running-in" period, if you will.  Then we'll know if there are limits to what we can build in terms of height.

So, not entirely pointless then.

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.