I visited my bank branch a few days ago, to pay in a cheque using the ATM. Yesterday I received a text from the bank asking me to fill in a survey about my experience. I would like to think that somebody at XXX Bank plc thought (at 8.42pm) that this was something worth chasing up. Let’s ask Mr Challen (of all people!) how he managed to slip that cheque (a cheque!) into the slot? Was it the right way up? Did the machine snatch the cheque with suitable panache? Did the machine decode the handwriting accurately? Did you get a prompt receipt? Was anybody looking over your shoulder (like one of our assistants)? Was your intercourse with us exceptional? Fantastic? Amazing? Fabulous? (We’re not quite sure which superlative to use, so we’ll take a leaf out of Virgin’s playbook and use them all.) Thank you for completing this survey! It will help us blend our customer experiences into the electronic synaptic structure of our impenetrable consumer satisfaction matrix, which will shortly have a massive dump. On you. Thank you again. Your custom is apprecitited/(enter code)EXIT:ENTER:Salutation signoff
0 Comments
1.
The ‘big’ news today – laughably – is that the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow has told his friends that he intends to stand down next year – ten years after being elected. This comes as no news to those of us who originally supported him, since he said many times that he thought two terms or ten years quite sufficient. The hacks know this of course, but it ties in nicely with the story of a bullying culture in Westminster. Naturally, leading the charge to oust Bercow are the Tories, who mostly never liked him and liked him even less when he allowed the Commons to have a greater oversight over the executive. Ministers hate being called to the chamber to answer for their cock-ups. Anyway, this ‘news’ will spark a race for the next Speaker, and I bet lobbying has already begun (probably started quite a while back, actually). Technically and by convention the next Speaker should come from the Opposition benches, since Bercow was nominally a Tory. But with a Tory Party on the ropes in the year of Brexit they will try desperately to get one of their own in. They might have a slight chance of success. Perhaps they should support someone from the DUP. There’s a cohort of individuals who understand democratic processes. 2. I watched a film the other night, Lord of War (2006) starring Nicholas Cage, who was perfect in the role of an utterly amoral arms dealer (I fear the word amoral to be redundant here, substitute ‘international’ instead). It grabbed my attention from the very start by its reference to Brighton Beach, New York. Google Brighton Beach and you will find that it is “Also known as "Little Odessa" due [to] its tight-knit Russian and Eastern European communities, Brooklyn's Brighton Beach is a lively neighborhood with many high-rise residential buildings. Traditional ethnic restaurants and food markets line Brighton Beach Avenue. The beach and boardwalk here are more laid-back than nearby Coney Island, catering largely to locals. Splashy nightclubs attract partiers in the evenings.” Two people who had a particular interest in Brighton Beach were Donald Trump and Semion Mogilevich. Brighton Beach was a development opportunity for Trump. Mogilevich was (is?) a Russian Mafia ‘boss of bosses,’ close to Putin. Rather than me trying to sum up all the connections (which are complex) that tie Trump to the Russian mob, just Google Trump/Mogilevich and take it from there. It’s curious that this stuff doesn’t get more sustained attention in the mainstream media. I have reviewed a book on the subject for Lobster, available here. I do hope that the U.S. Special Counsel investigating the Trump-Russia connection comes up with the indictable goods. 3. I have been overwhelmed by the U.K. government’s condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s murder in Istanbul of a dissident Saudi journalist. It’s good to know that Theresa May has been in the vanguard of judges on the issue, but for the life of me I haven’t been able to find out how many Saudi diplomats have been expelled from the U.K. so far. None you say? Can that be true? Are we to assume our strong and stable leadership is in hock to the Sheiks? Perhaps one of the benefits of the further deindustrialisation of the U.K. economy post-Brexit will be a diminution of hypocritical sucking-up to places we shouldn’t be dealing with in the first place. A report in today’s Guardian that the ‘Socialist Workers’ Party had been infiltrated by around two dozen undercover coppers has brought back memories of the revolution. I was living in Hull in the 1980s and was involved with a local community organisation that possessed an old building which we classed as our community centre. I became a member of the committee, and with one or two part-time members of staff, everything ticked over as well as it might in this inner city enclave of run-down Thatcherite Britain. One of our committee members was in the SWP, and was adept at applying for YOPS placements. The Youth Opportunities Programme was seen at the time as the future for Britain under the Tories – no real jobs, just pretend ones for up to a year in the voluntary sector. By today’s standards it might be seen as equivalent to FDR’s New Deal. Anyway, our fellow committee member crafted a successful application, and we soon found ourselves with 18 new employees and a manager.
Then the SWP took firm control. The crafter of the application resigned from the committee on the grounds that SWP members could not take management roles. Within weeks the turmoil started, as the workers’ ‘shop steward’ – another SWP member – took on the management with endless grievances which all could of course be anticipated on a YOPS scheme. The management committee, consisting of local residents soon found themselves cast as kulaks, to be exposed as Enemies of The People. The workers went on strike and a stand-off ensued. The playgroup became a no-go area. I wonder if three year olds crossed the picket line. Of course, the end result was that the whole scheme was wrapped up, and the revolution came one step closer. But I wonder now if any of those Hull SWP jerks was an undercover cop, gaining credits in capitalism’s covert battle to errr . . . make the SWP look even more stupid than it was. This particular battle must have been one of the SWP’s few actual successes in the 1980s, not that it brought the house down. For some reason the Guardian article refers to the SWP as a ‘revolutionary’ party. I often wondered what that meant. Did it mean staying in the Welly pub for a lock-in? Or did it mean sourcing some explosives and blowing up Drax power station? Or even just a pylon? Whatever the case, the story of the historic undercover cops still has value to the state. Who says there aren’t still state infiltrators in the SWP? I hope SWP top dogs look at each other with suspicion. Perhaps a purge or two, Stalin-style are in order. On the other hand, we taxpayers could question why any of our money should be spent on keeping tabs on a bunch of ‘revolutionary’ no-hopers. For the second time this year I am switching energy supplier. I have lost all shame about being promiscuous. There was a time when being ‘loyal’ had a grip, largely I suppose because your supplier had your name and address – unlike swapping toothpaste for example, where you can do it anonymously. But even then, it took me about 40 years to realise that the toothpaste of my youth wasn’t the only one on the market. What’s prompted this latest switch is yet another absurd price rise – we’re talking of hundreds of pounds – and the email announcement which came with it, merely referring to a ‘price change,’ a rather coy reference to a whopping increase. Do these businesses really believe that toning down their language fools customers? I was always amused each year when my local buses had signs saying ‘fare changes in operation.’ Increases, never decreases.
Switching energy suppliers is thankfully a lot easier, and using moneysupermarket.com (yes, an unashamed, unpaid plug) helps it all along. But questions arise. I have used 100% renewable energy suppliers for nearly 20 years, and I have always resented the fact that despite paying a premium (from the days when it was just a fad for some middle class types) to today when the price of renewable generation is falling dramatically, there is no reflection of that in market. The market for electricity is hugely complex, and I suspect it is in the interests of suppliers (including network operators) to keep it complex. The price you pay for renewable energy is still related to what’s going on in the wholesale fossil fuel markets. I hope any discussion of renationalising our energy supply will begin to take this into account. There needs to be a greater premium placed on buying fossil fueled energy, and reduced prices for renewables. To a certain extent I am willing to accept that fossil fuels are facing a stiffer challenge, but they are still given financial and other incentives which renewables aren’t. Fracking is a case in point, and of course the galactic subsidies nuclear gets are too great for most of us to comprehend. I am not confusing nuclear with fossil fuels – I am merely considering disparities in government funding and legislative support, which cramp renewable energy’s true potential. And then there’s the IPCC’s latest report . . I’m still waiting to hear what Theresa May has to say about that. Our state broadcaster’s top news item this morning was the identification by the Bellingcat website of the ‘true’ identity of the second Russian in the Skripal case. Mirthlessly, but with due gravitas listeners were told that sources in the intelligence service had no problem with Bellingcat’s revelation. Of course, Bellingcat has absolutely no relationship with said service, so in a sense MI6’s insouciance is explicable, after all deniability is their game and if Bellingcat had got things right or wrong it need be of no concern to them. Even if they had helped the website’s ‘investigative journalists’ along the way (which of course they didn’t). But politicians may want to ask if Bellingcat is doing so well all on its own, why are we pumping extra millions into MI6? Perhaps this is an area where there is now a proven outsource provider.
I am now looking forward to Bellingcat’s revelations about the CIA’s efforts to infiltrate Corbyn’s Labour. I wonder who the Americans' ‘assets’ are now? Surely Bellingcat will reveal all? Following the confirmation of Trumps’ latest pick for the Supreme Court, speculation has mounted that the Republicans will do better in November’s mid-term congressional elections. Republicans it seems are energised by displays of misogyny, ill-will and arrogance. It seems the opinion polls are now painting a more complex picture, when not so long ago the Democrats looked a shoe-in for taking control of the House of Representatives and may even have had a long shot at the Senate. It has to be said that this time round the Democrats are defending far more seats than the Republicans, so it was always on them to win more seats, rather than the Republicans to lose them. Excellent analysis of the race(s) can be found on the fivethirtyeight.com website.
One wonders of course what difference it would make if the Democrats did win. One looks at the record of Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin for example. He supported Trump’s nomination earlier this year of someone who supported torture as head of the CIA; he supported Trump’s latest pick for the Supreme Court. Apparently Manchin represents a right leaning state and so wants to keep his seat. So he behaves like a Republican. Which only goes to show that if you want the real thing, vote for it. If I were a Republican why would I vote for Manchin? The Democrats are in a mess and the right seems to be more accepting of Trump. The only reason I can think of for rooting for the Democrats is to clip his wings. Today we have seen the publication of yet another ‘landmark’ report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is destined to sit on top of a pile of previous landmark IPCC reports. With the now likely election of another populist in Brazil, who is threatening to pull out of the Paris climate change agreement, there is developing an anti-climate change axis, and Trump will reap further endorsement for his Neanderthal mindset. The time has passed when it was felt sufficient to mock an allegedly dysfunctional Trump presidency. He appears to be in tune with the zeitgeist, not merely in the States but elsewhere. We may have had entertainment value from books exposing the inner workings of the White House, with juicy titbits from disgruntled former aides, but these exposés, illuminating as they may be of Trump’s psychological issues detract from the bigger picture. The alarm bells are ringing. It’s difficult to know whether to laugh or cry at the latest goings-on in the high end art world. First there was an exploding piece by ‘Banksy,’ which just after selling for £1 million allegedly self-destructed. Now some members of the high end art priesthood are saying the piece could be worth even more. Next time a Banksy comes up, I’ll bid £1 million for it, and when the time comes to pay I’ll simply explain I flushed the cash down the toilet. That would be a laugh, wouldn’t it?
Now I learn that Russian billionaire Dimitry Rybolovlev is suing Sotheby’s for $380 million on the grounds that they allegedly took part in a fraud, overcharging the oligarch on 38 pieces (story in Apollo magazine). Poor Dimitry should read more about the art world and take steps to not make himself look like a prat. He could do no worse than begin his education with Brian Sewell’s autobiography Outsider (Vols. I & II) or Philip Hook’s Breakfast at Sotheby’s. It’s the very job of these auction houses to hype up the prices and maintain a false market – all in cahoots with dealers. And another fairly recent art world story suggests that a significant fraction of much that goes on sale is fake anyway. How could you tell, I hear you cry? Why, some of the artists may not be artists at all, but just ‘provocateurs’ to use Arts Council-speak. Dimitry would be better advised to save his lawyers’ fees and buy some Rembrandt etchings instead. I made a short trip to Bruges last week (another art Perambulation appears under Groeningemuseum). Make the most of Europe before Brexit, I say! It seems to me that along with our devalued pound, we must now face longer queues at passport control, or as it now appears passport controls. Why do the authorities need to check our passports twice? Don’t the various computer systems talk to each other? This does not bode well for the so-called technological solution to borderless Ireland/Northern Ireland trade. Indeed, one only has to recall all the hapless government computer initiatives to see how flawless transactions will soon be, and not just in Northern Ireland. Making friction free trade happen between the UK and the EU will make the introduction of Universal Credit look like a three year old handling two building bricks. Or Iain Duncan Smith with two building bricks. What an unbelievably complacent shower of ministers we have. I realise they are duty bound as politicians to say that everything is going to be ticketyboo after Brexit but behind Whitehall’s net curtains I think it is fair to assume that they are utterly in the dark. I shall definitely squeeze another trip to Bruges in before the shitstorm arrives on March 29th 2019.
Of course I didn’t listen to Boris Johnson’s speech today, although I am sure it is available somewhere on Youtube. I heard the gist of it in the media. Due to a slight lie-in this morning I nevertheless caught Theresa May on the Today programme, and only wish I’d slept in for a bit longer. She was unable to answer even the simplest of questions, but instead sought to answer the questions that were rattling randomly around inside her head – and didn’t even do that very successfully. One can only imagine that her seeing off Andrea Leadsom for the leadership of the Tory party remains her greatest triumph. What a triumph!
Where we are now is all the more disturbing when one considers the stakes. In the past, and forever in the future there will be differences within political parties, but compare the Tories’ current situation with situations past. When Kinnock was taking on Militant in the 80s there was no question of whether Labour was about to succumb to the Tendency – it was a tendency confined to a relatively small number of enclaves, and didn’t have the resonance amongst members to make it a full-on insurgency. It was a much detested thing for those of us who sat through meetings with Millies seeking to exert their influence. The Bennite left couldn’t disassociate itself from Militant, but never praised it. For Tony Benn it was just a case of democrashy, let everybody have their say. Yes, we had the Gang of Four and people began to write off the Labour Party, but our electoral system broke the back of the SDP and with it the Liberal alliance faded away. The Labour Party had a bad time, but survived and came back, albeit with a much pinker tinge. Then we had the Blair/Brown stuff, pored over in the media as if the soul of the party had suffered some kind of nuclear fission event, splintering into such separate camps (sorry for all the mixed metaphors) that it faced implosion. But Blair and Brown clearly didn’t have much disagreement about policy direction – the only split was over responsibilities. Gordon was as new Labour as his titular boss. I think we are now in a different position, because of Brexit. Never mind all the talk of Labour rightists starting a new party, the place to look for that is firmly on the Tory right (and the anti-remain faction may end up being called the Conservative Party). What makes the current situation extraordinary is the fate of Brexit. I don’t think the seriousness of this even compares with, e.g. unilateralism in Gaitskell’s day. If we had unilaterally abandoned nuclear weapons it wouldn’t have made a jot of difference to anything. I believe even Enoch Powell thought the UK ‘deterrent’ was a waste of money – he thought the Americans should pay for it. But Brexit is different. It is already affecting people’s lives – we are already paying higher prices as a result of the uncertainty – and the government is so fundamentally split that the E.U. cannot be sure who it is negotiating with. In other words, we already have two governments, a nominal government under May, and a shadow government (which exercises real power) under the Johnson/Rees-Smug Axis. It looks like we’ll have to labour under this dual government for quite a while yet, hence Labour’s demand for a general election. The trouble is, how would Labour fare if this election took place before March 29th, 2019? The Archbishop of York John Sentanu has announced his retirement, for 2020. He will have time for a farewell tour. It wasn’t long after he was appointed that he showed his solidarity with the homeless by sleeping in a tent. Inside York Minster. This rather strange gesture of course made the news, and Sentanu’s eye for a story was never blind for long. Who could forget the moment when Robert Mugabe’s bones must have quivered in fear when Sentanu said he wouldn’t wear his dog collar until the dictator was gone. Another brave but dare we say ineffectual gesture. Sentanu once sent all MPs a copy of something called “The One Hundred Minute Bible.” I read it, partly to see what the editors had done with Leviticus, which must be one of the most unpleasant chapters in that tome. For some reason its sheer unpleasantness didn’t survive the editors’ scissors. Anyway, in a spirit of reciprocal generosity I sent Sentanu my only copy of Sam Harris’s “Letters to a Christian,” which was equally short, and asked that as he had with me, he read it. I don’t think he paid me the compliment, and when I briefly met him at a reception and reminded him of this exchange, I got the impression that he thought I must have trod in some dog muck. The arrogance of faith, I suspect.
|
Archives
March 2024
|