Aspiring scribbler

My Conundrum

2012-09-26T13:22:00.000-07:00

I have a problem (aside from the inability to write regularly on this blog)

I liked Nick Clegg's pitch today. It was full of ugly bastardisations of the English language and mixed metaphors, which I believe is the best way to use our mongrel tongue. But I liked the sentiment as well, despite Nick's often poor political radar, it was an astute pitch to the centre ground.

I am, first and foremost, a centrist. I used to be a Marxist, but then lost a bit of faith in righteousness of the state and, rather than turn to the perrenial disillusionment of being a socialist who doesn't happen to like Government (cos you know, those voters have a tendency of not socialist ideals. Damn them...), I became a Liberal [fullstop] Democrat [fullstop]. And a lib dem.

However, I think Nick Clegg's party doesn't agree with him. I fear the weight of the party is made up of the kind of socialists I could have been but aren't. Mistrusting of government, not because of any actual deep seated lack of faith in the rightness of state action, but because the state isn't the state they want it to be. To me that's not liberalism. Its not even social democracy. Its anarcho-socialism. I have little interest in it. Less still in watching it slowly grind away at an (albeit flawed and at times foolish) attempt at responsible national government.

Had I been but three years older I imagine I would have ended up in Tony Blair's tent. Ed Miliband has a different form of tent, which I don't really like (Cameron doesn't do tents I imagine. Marquees maybe...). Perhaps I should pretend I am but that little bit older and switch tents, or at least leave mine and go shopping.

Thoughts over the last seven weeks

2012-08-19T12:39:00.001-07:00

1) I'm crap at being busy at work and also doing writing/blogging.

2) The London 2012 Olympics were wonderful. I was firmly in the cynical camp to begin with (well, about the transport system, not about TeamGB), but it all worked out well.

Unlike most of our civic celebrations, the Olympics wasn't entirely orientated around the Monarchy, so it lacked the deferential starchy air which we so often envelop ourselves in in this country. London was proud that is carried on working, volunteers were proud of their roles, the public was proud of our team and the fact we didn't fuck up the organisation, the country was proud of the armed forces for filling G4S's void and proud of our flag (for a change). For a few fleeting moments there was even pride in our politicians, as Boris Johnson bashed Mitt Romney. Well, in one of our politicians- Dave Cameron had an awful Olympics; wandering from blunder to blunder about playing fields and gibbering about "competitive sports" like one side beating the other was all Olympians cared about. Yes, they want to win Dave, but they mostly seem to want to be the best and do their best. Look only at the jubilations about personal bests and bronze medals. In the future Dave, just shut up.

3) I am righteously fed up with Nick Clegg, who is actually getting worse as a politician. The ridiculous stance on reform of the House of Lords was just pathetic. Talk about the wrong sodding ditch. The country is in a recession, up to our eyeballs in deficit and you choose the Lords as the place to pick a fight with the Tory backbenchers. Yes, Nick, they will be nasty to you. They don't like you. They are not in your party. Don't pout and sulk when they do. He should have done a deal with Labour, openly and publicly to fuck the Tories on Lords (assuming he was so desperate to get something done- I'd have never broached the idea- more important things to deal with). He needs to find something meaningful to solve which people can actually see (the big problem with taking people out of tax is that its hidden in people's pay packets- its likely to garner more goodwill for people's employers than for their Govt...). Continuing to ponder leaving the LDs- every time I see MPs and members ranting about issues such as Lords reform and talking about the nasty Tories being mean to them I just get more disheartened.

4) Europe's basket case politicians meandering trek towards being more integrated continues to amuse and rather frighten me. Hopefully they can take Greece and the others with them, because pushing them out would be bloody ugly. If something does emerge, I do think there is opportunity here for the Brits. The detail and the ugliness will mean some countries don't/can't (due to their electorate) get too involved. This might leave us with some "in but out" friends. I'm sure we will fail very dismally to get properly cosy with them. Maybe enlisting some of the London 2012 volunteers as diplomats might help us.

5) I think we should give a serious amount of support to the rebels in Syria, including weapons (if we aren't already).

More regular service is hoping to be restored. We are aspiring towards it.

Crapness matters more than immorality

2012-07-08T10:13:00.001-07:00

My take on the banking sector

Comments about immortality in latest bout of banker bashing are thoroughly justified. This was clearly a sector blighted by the greed and immorality of certain individuals.

As a result, a lot of the focus on how to fix things has been on dealing with the morality of the sector and changing its culture. Clearly there were cultural problems and a short termist, quick money ethos. But my concern with this emphasis and corresponding focus on how evil bankers were is that it is likely to end up missing the solution.

Having listened and read about what was going wrong, I have a significant hunch that the causal factor behind the failings and, corresponding, the remedy, was one of godawful management. Nobody knew enough or could control the actions of individuals, targets were too short term-ist, rewards were for the wrong thing (and too high), there wasn't anywhere nearly enough scrutiny.

Focusing on improving management, instituting more sensible rewards (and not just monetary rewards) and proper values and appraisals is, in my opinion, likely to yield more success in improving the banking sector than simply bashing them. Maybe some of the banks could pull in some consultants from the state or not for profit sectors to advise them on how to do this effectively?

Need for escapism

2012-07-01T06:07:00.000-07:00

Politics getting all a bit too disheartening. Time for some more escapism.

I haven't blogged in a while. Partly this is as a result of a work trip to Japan (interesting place, sushi boring, lots of nice mini restaurant bar things, apparent continued separation of sexes odd, very few tourists). But also, my usual ranty nature has been replaced by a sense of despair.

The Europeans still haven't properly got to grips with their crisis and seem incapable of doing so. Our government is enjoying an unhealthy island mentality. The opposition are hypocrites, if a bit more effective than they were. There is no news on a new social care settlement. The budget is an ongoing omnishambles. My own party leader things people will be remotely bothered about him wandering around the country defending his record (no one cares Nick). Bankers have actually been practicing dark arts, rather then just greed induced incompetence.

What is a passionate political junky to do?

Well, I'm thinking some roast beef this evening. Maybe a spur of writing, a lessening of my economist addiction and a return to fiction reading. I might have another look at that magistrate application form which has been lingering.

Why I was embarrassed...

2012-06-05T10:20:00.001-07:00

I'm not sure what the media or the history books will say about the diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II. The concert was odd, the flotilla was boring and frankly a bit pathetic (but good background noise for furniture construction) and I have no idea about the rest of it. I got the impression the royals either thought it amusing or frankly boring. Maybe Liz had a nice day at the races? She was probably a but put out by Phil not being so well (I hope he gets better).

I suspect the weather put paid to plans for street parties and the like, although I'm sure some soldiered on. My own flat (re) warming was enjoyable and soaked in cynicism.

But, if I'm honest, its all been a bit of an embarrassment hasn't it? I don't just mean the BBC going royalist mad (but not managing to make their coverage work), or the rained off street parties or the fact Phil was ill, or the odd bits in the concert that didn't really work which resulted in twitter having a field day. Nor do I just mean the monarchy itself (although I do find them embarrassing).

We are a country with much going for it. A vibrant culture, great sporting prowess, a somewhat dented but powerful economy. But what embarrasses me is that the only thing we seem to be able to celebrate is our history. Be it the steeped in tradition ceremonies, the royals themselves or the world war flypast at every state occasion.

We must remember where our nation has come from and its past and use that to guide our future. But do we really need to celebrate it so? To have it as the very essence of our culture?

Perhaps its easier for the Europeans, scarred still by the last world war, or the still youthful Americans. Perhaps that is why our commentators hark back to the 50s and 60s, yearning for days when we did look to the future?

My lasting feeling from this jubilee is that I hope at some point Britain, particularly England starts looking forwards as a nation and considers what destiny we want for our future.

ps. Awful long time since last post- I blame DIY and redecorating.

The politics of spending

2012-05-06T13:40:00.000-07:00

A Hollande Presidency poses a greater threat to Ed Miliband than it does to David Cameron.

Cameron had (another) bad week. Labour's tally of councils and seats in the local elections was impressive. Their share of the vote was less so. The LDs practically imploded and UKIP surged in vote numbers, both of which helped Ed Miliband. Nevertheless, the coverage was good and will have boosted Labour's standing.

Taken in the light of the victory for the Socialists in France and anti-austerity parties performing well in Greece, these elections might be sign of a vindication of those who have called current pressure to cut spending to be slowed or even stopped. Personally I doubt this. A 32% turnout proves more that the electorate is indifferent and unimpressed, both with Government and opposition, not that they are screaming for change. The competence of the Government is more an issue than its policy on deficit Government. If it seemed more competent, perhaps did a bit less but did it well, the deficit reduction might still be punishing the LDs, but it wouldn't be hurting the Tories.

But, let us take the assumption as correct, that there is at least tacit support for austerity in UK. The reality is that the French decision to back Hollande over Sarkozy will put Ed Miliband and Ed Balls ideas to the strictest of tests; that of reality. If France grows and seems to get to grips, they will be able to claim vindication before even they face an election. But what if it fails? What if their borrowing costs rise, Hollande fails to deliver on his promises of teachers and pensions, growth falters yet more and aspirational Frenchies start turning up in Germany and England? What then for the two Eds?

The economics of austerity are being tested. They are being found to be painful, divisive and, in the short term certainly, damaging to growth. But what about the economics of spending? Well, we shall see won't we Eds?

ps. The American spending comparison doesn't quite fit. State spending is a much smaller proportion of GDP, they have a younger population, the world's reserve currency and are much more willing to accept social and economic inequality. Besides they have a major problem with debt which they haven't dealt with. I do think we should be investing more in infrastructure, which the yanks have been doing.

The joy of voting

2012-05-02T15:25:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow I shall leave my flat and take a very very minor detour to work- to the primary school over the road- and tick some boxes on some bits of paper.

The people I tick will probably lose. It has been this way through all of my voting life. I voted LD in Durham in 2005 having missed voting in 2001 by a few months... (they lost). Before that I voted for a regional Assembly in the North East (it was resoundingly trounced in the referendum). I voted for Brian Paddick and second preferenced Ken Livingstone in London in 2008, alongside voting for LD candidates for the Assembly (Boris got in and the LDs lost seats). I voted for LDs in 2010 in Streatham (we lost) and I voted for the Alternative Vote in 2011 (and that was just a fucking disaster).

The above might have taught me that voting doesn't really matter. It might have taught me that I shouldn't be a LD and it might have taught me that I have terrible political judgement or have beliefs distinctly out of line with the majority opinion.

It hasn't, or maybe it has slightly, but that's not the point.

The point is I get to tick a box as do lots of other people and by this process we can change how we are governed and by who. Its not a perfect system, it lacks the engagement we are used to in the modern world and the choices oft seem samey, bonkers or just plain dishonest. But if there's a better system for sorting things out in a country of 60 million I'd like to see it

I can see the polling station from my window and I look forward to watching people head to vote. I hope there will be queues.

Latest scribbling development

2012-04-22T11:16:00.001-07:00

The title of this blog is aspiring scribbler and it has basically become a political rant. So here is one of my current ideas for aspiring scribblings.

Its Science fiction.

Humanity has colonised the galaxy and found no other intelligent life.

The colonisation and spread of humanity has been instigated primarily by corporations. Earth has been under blockade for two centuries and is fairly redundant to the story.

The biggest threats to this commercial existence are:
1) A growing interplanetary movement in favour of federalisation of planetary governments. Broadly seen as a bit nutty and idealistic, the hardcore commercial leaders are nevertheless terrified by them.
2) A terrorist grouping of cybernetic and mechanoid lifeforms called The Council for the Perpetual Revolution (CPR). They used to be relatively peaceful, but have now been hijacked by extremists and have recently wrecked a waterworld, killing millions.

The scene in the story is based around the blockade of a system which has allied itself to the CPR and where its leaders are hiding. A massive military build up has surrounded the planet (Tistovia, a totalitarian communist planet) and the CPR fleet with the aim of using overwhelming force and technology to destroy the CPR.

Enter three things into the equation which make it go pear shaped.
1) An unhinged very advanced cyborg who steals a revolutionary jump-ship from
2) Another very advanced cyborg, related to the first, who has been hiding out as CEO of the 7th largest galactic corporation and has developed jump-ship technology (ships at the moment have to use vast static jump gates).
3) An unholy and secretive alliance between the largest and most dominant corporation (Marcorp) and the Federalists.

Its about 11000 words at the moment.

Philanthropic foolishness

2012-04-12T16:05:00.000-07:00

I'm bemused by the latest clusterfuck the Government has created for itself from the budget, but not half as bemused as they seem to have made themselves. David Gauke, the Treasury minister, does a good line in defence of the tax relief changes but, and maybe its just his facial expression, one does get the impression all this charity stuff is rather new to him.

Certainly its evident George Osborne, Nick Clegg and David Cameron didn't expect this at all. The treasury has no stats on how much money will be lost to charities and sounds desperate when it gibbers about the dodgy charities. Indeed, its response to the question as to why the charity commission hasn't dealt with such charities is that they aren't that bad, they just look a bit bad in terms of tax (?!?!). So, we have grades of charity now set my HMRC?

Just as worryingly, it seems the Government failed to have conversations with itself. Vince Cable has joined on the bandwagon to complain about this, but it also seems has the normally loyal Jeremy Hunt wasn't told about this and isn't too happy. (this link is well worth a read). Indeed, David Gauke's admission on newsnight that he didn't know if Hunt knew is probably ad admission that he didn't. Moreover, enough Tory backbenchers are pissed off to make this potentially toxic for Cameron and Osborne, who had probably hoped Labour's collapse in Bradford would have allowed them to move on from the budget.

Clearly Clegg's idea of a Tycoon tax as cover for the 50-45p reduction hasn't worked. The Govt have managed to create an alliance of rich philanthropists, liberal minded charities and the daily mail against them (the Guardian seems happy with the policy, though they agree messaging has been a mess). Whats more they have angered the right on an issue associated with social good and one which normally isn't that divisive. Given previous statements on philanthropy and the central role the Government sees charities playing in their plans, perhaps they should spend time learning about what makes them tick.

Clegg needs to get a grip of his committee

2012-04-04T15:05:00.001-07:00

Nick Clegg is failing to use what powers he has to his advantage.

Nick Clegg is often portrayed as a rather pathetic figure in Government. His polling numbers are dreadful (just 5% according to today's YouGov feel he would make best PM), he has performed a variety of U-turns on policies which the public saw as signifying the LDs and he seems stuck in between the Tories, Labour and his own parliamentary colleagues.

Clegg and his position of Deputy Prime Minister may be seen as a joke, but he has genuine powers. Clegg chairs the Home Affairs (HA) Committee and so signs off all domestic policies. This means he signed off both the controversial and political buggerfuckup of the NHS reforms and the latest proposals around civil liberties. Clegg could, and arguably should, have been able to head off these controversies and saved himself hassle and embarrassment.

So why didn't he?

I propose three possible reasons, not mutually exclusive.

1) He might simply not have understood/reacted to the policies. I very much doubt this- Clegg might not be an expert on the NHS, but he knows his civil liberties and I refuse to believe he wouldn't have known the implications.

2) He might not be using his civil servants effectively. Clegg could have undoubtedly sought briefing on these issues from his civil servants, but maybe is he isn't- perhaps preferring his political advisers advice?

3) He is at least in part aware of the issues these policies contained, but let them slip so he could fight a public war, thinking this might better improve his image.

Whatever combination of the above is the reality, Clegg has to start using the HA committee much more effectively. It provides him with opportunity to get policy wins and scrutinise Government departments, potentially heading off or at least better understanding Tory department plans. If Clegg thinks public spats with the Tories on these issues are preferable, he should look at LD and his own poll ratings. He should consider whether he can actually beat the Tories and Labour political machines. He should ponder whether his ratings are the result of not publicising LD wins or because the party and the country are being forced to eat Tory shit.

Funding politics: rocks and hard places

2012-03-27T04:15:00.000-07:00

When David Cameron gave his response to #dinnergate (or #cash4cameron or whatever you want to call it) he sounded convincing, at least to me. But politicians do tend to sound more convincing in the flesh than they do on TV or radio. He certainly sounded like he wanted to draw a line under the affair. There was an undertone of almost sighing exasperation in his voice. Whether that was because he wanted to kill the story dead, thought it was all bollocks, or just wanted to talk about what he had come to talk about I don't know.

It has been said what makes this damaging is that its about purchasing power. I'm not so sure. In the media and the public minds I don't there there is much differentiation between sleaze and corruption. In reality, the former is a comment on someone's morality and the second is an abuse of position, which is in itself a comment on morality. Both fell careers and both feed into a view that politicians are all dodgy. What makes #dinnergate damaging is firstly that it is about one party, unlike, for example, the expenses scandal, which affected all three big Westminster parties and secondly, its about the Prime minister, who pretty much everyone knows.

On the first issue- it doesn't help that the Tories are in Government and they are the Tories, This is how they get their money, through donations from rich individuals and business.

On the second- Cameron is by some margin the most high profile figure in the Government. He is rich, he was privately educated, he sounds like a toff, he looks like the gentry. Anything which impacts on how he is seen bring the entire Government down with him. A fact made worse as he has been consistently more popular than either the Tories or the Government (eg see here), weaken him and you the Coalition and Tories ratings might end up in free fall.

So where are the rocks and hard places? For the Tories - they need their individual and business donations. Labour won't surrender the union money (quite understandably) and there is no appetite for state funding (the LDs preferred option). None, I imagine, want politics in the UK to end up where it is in the US, where politicians are part time legislators and full time fundraisers. But, for all three giving up on money would mean they couldn't do as much campaigning and would have to rely on the media more, and we know where that road leads.

For Cameron- He will probably launch some all out gung ho attempt to clean up funding politics, but in the future anything with links to big funders or business will be pawed over. Any moves in policy will be analysed for what influence may have led to them. We've already seen this with the health bill. On his background- well Cameron can't do much about that, and nor should he. I think we have enough dishonesty in politics already.

"Dear public, I'll be alright really, its okay. Yours ever, The National Health Service"

2012-03-19T15:02:00.001-07:00

Dear UK public

I do thank you for your concern over what has been a difficult time for me. Change never comes easy and several aspects of my personality have very significant reservations about the direction of travel that has been chosen for me.

I know many of you are thinking that I will end up being sold off or that you will have to pay (directly, as well as your very generous indirect contributions through tax) for access to me. Others have concern that, in this time of drift, some bits of me will drift off and I will lose many skills which I am only just now beginning to develop, or that I will become patchy, poorly coordinated and reckless in my freedom from political control.

Can I assure you that I will, except for those exemptions that frankly you all use very often- teeth, eyes and medicines, remain free. And, while there may be some bits of the private sector coming under my banner, let me assure you the central dictat and control is, if anything, strengthened by this Bill. Concern over expertise is justified, but I hope through the regional aspects of my commissioning board, to keep many of those with the greatest skills. And besides-those bits that are lost are likely to just cross over to the private sector and get back involved anyway.

The establishment of health and wellbeing boards could signal stronger, not weaker collaboration. And, if we're honest, I've never actually been so good at collaboration anyway, instead letting primary care, acute care, mental health and even subdivisions within these fight it out themselves. As for being patchy- well, as the NHS Atlas of variation shows I'm performing pretty badly on that front already.

Over the years I have become very popular with many of you and I remain very high in your regard (unlike my poor cousin social care...bless him). I do score very well on those cost efficiency and effectiveness comparisons. But I do feel I have too many hospitals, and while you love to save your local one, you do keep on telling me you want to be supported at home instead. I also remain far too focused on single episodes of care and fail to treat individuals as complexes of co-morbidities and different needs.

I'm not sure if these changes will make my aches and sores, nor yours, better. But I do worry that you treat me a little bit too preciously. I will change, some things might get worse (but if they do, it'll be more because your starving me of cash- I really do have a thing for consuming cash, it's a problem, I'm trying to deal with it). All I ask if you let these changes, this new attire and style bed down. Because I really need a time of stability and calm, ideally out and away of the public spotlight. If I had a doctor and he was any good, I'm sure that's what he'd prescribe.

Well, stay well, and don't worry too much, as its not healthy.

Yours, ever

The National Health Service

My life is words.

2012-03-18T16:30:00.000-07:00

Hobbies: attempting to scribble, reading other people's scribbles.

Job: policy wonk, entailing much scribbling and scribble reading.

I reckon both use pretty similar brain processes. Brain gets tired unfortunately. Hence lack of blog posting.

Few comments

Why does the Church of England and its leadership have such sway still? like the monarchy, its an outdated institution, but unlike the Monarchy, it seems incapable of responding to its outdatedness.

England valiant in 6 nations. Nice to see us comfortably beating the Irish. A rare sight since I've been following the annual tournament. Stuart Lancaster should keep his job.

The Government is announcing tomorrow a big thing about road privatisation. I have no idea if this is a good or bad thing. There is currently amusing debate on twitter. We may well be selling them to the Chinese... Does this mean they will deliberately fuck up roadworks around Vauxhall and Cheltenham?

The budget comes out this week.

I've had a shave, for the first time in ages. Look 12.

Tax is taxing (the adverts lied...)

2012-03-07T14:21:00.000-08:00

I've had a glass of wine so I'm going to blog about tax

George Osborne is in a bit of bind isn't he? Poor bastard has no money (except he has plenty of his own). He has to at least come up with a half response to the almost daily whingeings from the opposition about who his last cut hurt and where. He inherited some taxes he finds repugnant and he has a Coalition party who really quite want to impose some more which he definitely won't like.

In an ideal world it wouldn't have panned out like this for a Chancellor who was committed to "sharing the proceeds of growth". Alone, his party would have probably kept an inhumane threshold at which people start paying tax and provided tax breaks to married families. I'm glad its not an ideal world.

Instead he has some hard choices. He wants to get rid of the 50% tax on incomes above £150k (its actually 52%, but I'll deal with that in a sec), he wants to avoid some hideous mansion tax that shafts poor aged Tory voters who have properties but not income and he's getting pressure to raise the income tax threshold to £10k.

Here's my advice.

Firstly- if a mansion tax is adding layers to council tax banding, then its a great idea. Except you may find that tough because he ruled out re-banding council taxes and sold the software to do so. Bugger. If its just taxing properties with value more than £2m, then no. Yes, you will get some silly billionaires and their pads. But you'll also get plenty of biggish homes in desireable places, who are full of people with big incomes, but not big enough to afford a £20k tax. There will be retired people, children and family pets. It'll be ugly. I actually agree with property taxes, but this isn't how to implement them.

Secondly (I like my numbering...) £10k tax. Do it. Find the money. Raise it further.

Thirdly- the toughie. 50%... Well, the best thing to do would be to look at where the additional 2% comes from (national insurance) and abolish that. Then weave the entire system together, so our tax rates don't go- 32%, 42%, 52%, which sounds lovely, except the 32% is a fucker of a level of marginal tax to apply to people earning £12,000 or so. There you go George- you can probably shift things round so we don't increase tax on rich incomes, reduce it on the poor and make it fairer in the middle. (except the new "income tax" might apply to income from property etc. Ah, didn't think about that. Oooh, what a shame)

As an aside. Can right wingers please stop moaning about what proportion of tax the rich pay. They pay it for a reason. People on low and middle incomes can't. They can- they are rich.

An amateur's critique of Why It's Kicking Off Everywhere

2012-03-03T09:48:00.002-08:00

This week I finished reading @paulmasonnews' "Why its kicking off everywhere". I'm having a bit of time away from fiction and attempting to devour some politics and economics. Blair and Hayek are both currently half read, they may remain that way. However I cantered through Mason's ponderings at a mildly obsessive rate.

Its an excellent book, and has, on pages 113-115, an concise and devastating critique of New Labour's economic policy. I would advise all and sundry read it and would be very happy to loan my copy. However, while it left with with a warm fuzzy feeling and a mild desire to re-discover Marxism, Mason's book left me with a desire to critique. So here I go:

I have two big issues with Why its Kicking Off Everywhere.

Firstly, Mason makes two assumptions (one explicit and one implicit), that I think are incorrect:

Explicitly, he assumes a degree of common purpose between youth in shanty towns engaging with capitalism, those in the arab spring seeking greater political and economic freedom and self-determination, and those in the developed world protesting against inequality, apparent lack of opportunity and cuts to welfare systems. I don't know if this is true- they may have the same technology, language and attire, but how much of that is down, in fact, to effective advertising and marketing by capitalism? Are they all, in fact, consumers of the same products? Also, do youth who burnt out a popular party store I've been to in London have that much in common with entrepreneurs active and engaged in protecting and developing their shanty towns?

Implicitly, the book has an air of being anti-urban, almost anti-development. Mason talks about shanty towns as a shadow banking system, which props up the rest of society. I agree, much of the conditions in modern developing world urban environments are horrendous. But so can be the rural poverty people have come from. So is the life of pastorialists and hunter-gatherers dealing with climate change and pressure from agriculture. The question is how we enable opportunity to flourish, how we empower education and enable aspiration. Urban environments play a crucial role in this. That is not to say rural and other environments don't either, but people have moved to the cities to seek greater opportunity, is Mason suggesting they have been misled or their decisions are misguided? Becuase in the book those he speaks to seem quite adamant about protecting their new homes.

My second issue with Why Its Kicking Off Everyone is around the role of the state. Mason talks a lot about the inequities of capitalism and the inequality it creates, but he seems ambiguous towards states (I use this term rather than Governments, as the latter come and go), especially those in the developing world. In the developed world they thought housing and financial bubbles were real and spent taxes garnered through them accordingly, while in the developing world states have been often been indifferent to inequality within their borders. India has catastrophic levels of poverty, and yet is buying expensive modern fighter jets, has nuclear weapons and a space programme. Excuse my use of modern parlance, but wtf??

Indeed, I think where Mason misses a point is that if anything, the institution most at threat through the current crisis is the modern developed nation state. Companies can always go elsewhere to do business and find new consumers to buy products (such as budding entrepreneurs using blackberrys and laptops from shanty towns). States can't, and may find stagnant growth a permanent reality. Moreover, diminishing faith traditional "vote every x years" democracy, more porous boundaries and cheaper, easier and more commonplace information exchange (all highlighted in Why Its Kicking Off Everywhere) could raise existential questions about the legitimacy of old men in old buildings and lines in the sand.

Budapest

2012-02-29T01:52:00.000-08:00

Just back from a holiday to Budapest- below collection of random thoughts and ponderings.

1) Good and cheap wine. Where is it in UK?? Especially the fizzy stuff. I shall investigate.

2) Very meaty/dairy based food. Didn't have any shocking meals and had a couple of awesome ones. All quite cheap for what they were. Some portions were obscene. If you go- eat in the Gresham four seasons restaurant. It'll cost two people a little over £100 for three courses and wine, but it will be worth it.

3) Clearly high levels of unemployment and the place is looking fairly run down.

4) Amusing communist era enforcement of use of museum/gallery cloakrooms. Cloakroom staff mostly look like they have been doing the same job since 1957. Ridiculous numbers of staff in museums and galleries. Massively inaccurate prehistoric exhibitions :(

5) Not a country bathed in glorious history. Seem quite obsessed with their ill fated attempts at independence from Austria/the Nazis/Soviets.

6) They have made a concerted effort to fill in the bullet holes in the walls.

7) Some stunning architecture. Sadly a lot bathed in neon glow and other bits in need of plaster and paint.

8) Loved the heated outdoor swimming complex (again a bit in need of some plaster and paint here and there).

9) Bizarre number of wedding shops. Also lots of book and wine (as in selling both books and wine, but nothing else) shops...

10) Some tourist attractions rather oversold, some clearly a bit empty. Also,guide books- please don't advertise attractions you can't actually get into (like churches that are closed).

Liberal democracy?

2012-02-19T09:32:00.000-08:00

The internal democracy in the Liberal Democrats appears to be upping a gear, so here's my own political monologue.

Recently three new groupings have been launched within the Liberal Democrats.

The Social Liberal Forum- who seem to be LDs grudgingly accepting of the Coalition, but are mostly drawn from the left of the party.

Liberal Reform- who appear to be orange book economic liberals trying to reassert themselves

and Liberal Left- who are opposed to the Coalition and seem very angry at the leadership.

I'm nowhere near involved enough with the LDs to know what the impact of these factions might on the party. I joined the Liberal Reform group and naturally distrust Liberal Left, who in my opinion seem to be in the wrong party. I'm guessing after we get seriously hurt at the next election these grouping might be vessels through which party soul searching occurs.

If I'm honest most liberal democrats I've met have been disillusioned socialists, who know longer believe in the capacity of the state, because the stats is too right wing. There are then a good smattering of the kind of people who know might join Cameron's Tories, but didn't when they were becoming politically active because the Tories were seen as nasty.

I'm neither of these things. Once upon a time I was a Marxist, but I became disillusioned with the left as it seemed unrealistic and frankly a little bit whiny. Had I been 5 or ten years older I think I would have been very attracted to New Labour and would probably be a (despairing) member to this day.

But where am I now?

Fiscally left wing- probably- I believe in reasonable levels of taxation, but I have issues with redistribution where it would be possible to just not collect tax. It might not make much different in cash terms, but the Coalitions policy of raising tax free allowances is a fantastic principle. Personally I'd liked to see greater parity between income tax on jobs and other forms of income tax, ideally through abolition of national insurance and institution of truly progressive tax banding system.

On state or private service providers, I'm centre right. I don't believe having a profit motive means a company can't provide good quality public services. This isn't to say we can't have publicly owned and operated services- we can and they can be very effective, but the ethos has to be about service user/consumer empowerment. We should be trying to make money follow the service user- direct payments, personal budgets, not one size fits all, get what we give you. If its a public service, we've paid for it, we're a consumer, you deliver it how we want. As an aside I have issue with the division between public (seen as essential) and private (not so much) services. If every checkout staff went on strike for a week tomorrow it would cause as much disruption as if every train driver did.

On environmentalism. Sadly, this has never been an issue that has got my passions up. I believe we should be responsible and I know the massive human cost of not being, but when people start talking about massive cuts in consumption I just think its unrealistic. Also, its full of ambiguities. Should I buy fairtrade Kenyan roses that have been flown here or British ones? Is it better to buy CAP subsidised Italian cotton cardigans or ones made in China or Vietnam? Am I better to buy peppers grown in massive greenhouses in Spain (unemployment of 24%ish), or from North Africa or from England? Shall I cut down on unsustainable levels of meat eating and have unsustainable fish or pulses grown over former rainforests? Is it better to have a high speed train that cuts through countryside or another airport? I just don't know. I'm probably on the "left" of the issue, but the "right" in my party.

On defence/foreign policy. Blairite/hawkish. Iraq was a disaster not because it was wrong- it was a disaster because it was the wrong time and we should have finished the job in Afghanistan first. I cannot abide claims that what we did in Libya was imperialist or wrong. You can't be a humanitarian and not believe in conflict (well you can, but you are painfully naive and should be kept well away from policy making). But if we are to be interventionist, lets be open about it. We're going in because these people are dying in huge numbers and we have a duty to protect them. We also need to stop playing the double game or propping up nasty friends. If we support democracy and democrats, even if the resultant elected governments might not share our values, we will have a much easier ride of developing meaningful and honest relations with them.

Civil liberties- centre left. I believe in strong legislation to protect rights and that we must, as a society and state, adhere to the highest principles. But I can't get angry about ID cards and all that stuff. If the government wants to track what website I look at, if Tesco wants to analyse my shopping then go for it. I'm going to get on with my life.

Immigration- naturally on the very liberal left end of things. I like immigration and think immigrants do great things for the country. But there is an issue about impact on wages and problems around getting our own youth into jobs. But still, ideologically I think we should have as open a labour force as possible, backed up by rigid laws and enforcement around things like minimum wages.

So, I still feel the LDs are best suited to these set of beliefs, but in another day or age I could potentially be in any of the three parties. Ah, well, how many different parties was Churchill a member of again?? Or Teddy Roosevelt??

Coalition capacity

2012-02-11T05:17:00.000-08:00

While the Coalition tizzles over the "Liberating the NHS" the opportunity arises to pass comment on the state of the union (The economist has an excellent piece this week). If I may, I would like to add my amateur views to this debate.

Governments are always directed by events. One of the most effective criticisms leveled at Blair's engagement in Iraq was that it served as a monumental distraction from the daily activities of reforming a state which was costly, inefficient and delivered poor services to its population. That is a slightly amoral argument, but probably has a certain degree of truth in it. It was certainly the case that Blair lost political capital over Iraq, reducing his ability to drive forwards really radical public service reform.

The great event casting a rather ugly shadow over the Coalition is the continued crisis in Europe, which is undoubtedly dragging our economy downwards. When combined with the impact of spending cuts the British economy appears, if we're honest, rather akin to a English sports team. Full of a lot of potential, but disappointingly led, hampered by systemic and systematic failings and frankly rather lacklustre.

School reform, despite looking a bit messy to begin with, is performing best. Although it will lead to some mighty arguments over establishment of free schools here, benefits of academy's there and the role of local authorities all over.

Welfare reform has been buffeted, but IDS appears resolute (that we should not underestimate the quiet man now rings rather true). I expect some ugly headlines, concessions and some people will frankly be hurt very unfairly, but the Government has committed to carrying out reform, have a reasonable mandate for it and I suspect they will finish the job. It won't save the money they hope it will, but that will be Osborne's problem.

Communities and local government is the area where I am most disappointed and concerned. In some areas they are empowering local government (slightly in health, certainly with mayors and cities) in others they are stripping them of responsibility (schools reforms). Other areas, such as policing, are seeing the creation of wholly new systems. All over the place they have gutted finances and thrown all the money in together for councils to deal with. Local authorities lack the commissioning expertise to effectively cope with front loaded spending cuts. Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, has pursued an policy of washing his hands of responsibility and in doing so will have blighted the capacity for communities to actually think systemically about improving public services and think about how they can promote growth.

Health is its own black comedy. In essence elements, such as Any Qualified Provider (AQP), removing the private patient cap and establishment of health and wellbeing boards make a lot of sense, but they sink into a mire of complexities and confusion that baffle observers and are simultaneous to a efficiency drive the likes of which the world has never seen. Moreover, huge political capital has been spent on something for which there wasn't really much of a mandate, or, arguably, necessity.

Back to the economy and Europe- the Coalition clearly is in a degree of trouble over creating growth. Ideas about reducing public spending resulting in a spring for the private sector have been proven to be false and the Government commitment to reducing the deficit means there isn't the money for huge capital spending (which anyway, takes time to lead to growth). I'm more Hayekian than I am Keynesian, but I suspect that, unless the Coalition takes some very bold decisions on privatising public services, they will need to do some degree of planning about promoting growth. A start would be a robust review of how we promote small business exports and a review of business regulations and legislation to promote consumer empowerment. These would lie in Vince Cables' area of responsibility...oh dear.

Manifesto for the aggressive pedestrian

2012-02-07T12:11:00.000-08:00

Having recently signed up to receive tweets from the eminent Jon Snow, I saw his manifesto for safer cycling and it made me ponder (I agree with Jon, btw- but pls see the end for some brief serious thoughts)

So I am an aggressive pedestrian. I walk quickly and purposefully, especially at this time of year when its bloody cold. I'm also painfully inpatient in my pedestrianity and like to exert my walking rights. I therefore outline the following key thoughts on my experiences of being a pedestrian in London.
1) Pedestrians- when trying to board a crowded tube train (I know people are not strictly pedestrians at this point, but they usually have just been or are going to be in a very short while), please try to let me off first. If you don't I will usually drop my shoulder and you will struggle to get on the tube.
2) Cyclists- please stop at pedestrian crossings. They don't stay red for very long and I'm usually in as much of a hurry as you. Oh, and please don't get arsey with me if I point out you rode a red light cos you know damn well you would do the same if I walked out in front of you on a red man.
3) Cyclists- please try and use the cycle lane rather than the pavement if its there and sensible. I get some of them are just silly and lead nowhere and others are littered with parked cars, but pavements tend to be littered with pedestrians. Some may be aggressive.
4) Cyclists (sorry Jon...) Please try to avoid doing places you shouldn't. Like down one way roads. Basically I will normally assume you won't be there and that increases risks of collisions.
5) All road users- zebra crossings. Stop.
6) Vans, buses, lorry's etc (and cars sometimes). Don't block pedestrian crossings please. Just hang back a wait a few moments. Otherwise I have to walk round you and all the other pedestrians have to too and I'm never sure if you're going to try and drive away on red if the car in front moves on.
7) Cars et al; when you do that really courteous thing of letting someone turn right, please stop to check you're not encouraging them to plough through a horde of pedestrians.
8) Pedestrians- avoid walking in wide and silly groups. Don't stop at the top of escalators or round corners. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DON'T WALK AND READ- I hate having to dodge your clearly book addicted lumbering. Likewise for those using phones etc. Tourists- while annoying, I accept we need you here to spend money. Please leave the pavement and head for the nearest tourist attraction/shop ideally via taxi/bus/other form of paying transport.

In all seriousness, there were 58 pedestrians killed in London in 2010 out of nearly 5400 people injured in accidents. London is littered will ill placed crossings and places where crossings need to be (for example the Cavendish road/Thyme Road/Balham Hill/Clapham Common Southside junction near me). Most pedestrian lights in London don't give me time enough to cross, never mind slower walkers. I'd like to see some really brave thinking about pedestrianisation in London.

Blowing bubbles

2012-01-31T14:34:00.000-08:00

So, we have shredded Fred of his knighthood and Hester and the huntsman has been (pretty much) forced to return his million pound bonus (frankly, did the man want shares in the RBS anyway??- daily mash on form on this)

There is currently an understandable reaction to the failings of capitalism and evils of the bankers who most represent it. We got a bit grumpy in 2008, but the recent slump and downturn has acted as a catalyst for considerable anger.

I'm not fan of the bankers. They played games with people's aspirations for home ownership and fueled and encouraged bubbles of various forms (pg8) and types. There is a truth that it takes two to tango and that there were plenty of voices raising questions about the potential for bubble to inflate, but was that really going to arrest people's purchasing of houses??

But despite my dislike of the sector, I have four issues with the current clamour.

Firstly, we desperately need growth and especially export growth. Inflated, fake, illusory growth would be devastating. But the financial sector in the UK is a huge export industry and beggers can't be choosers. Support it, use revenues to grow other sectors, then perhaps we can "rebalance" our economy.

Secondly, a significant fault lies with governments. I'm not being partisan here, but growth (especially very keen growth) needs to be managed (I hear taxes and interest rates work well). Handing off responsibility to those bad people of the private sector is a crap excuse.

Thirdly, I don't want to live in a Society where the only wealthy people are footballers and film stars. I simply don't.

We need to reign in the financial sector and ensure that bonuses are paid for genuine performance, rather than for more blowing of bubbles. But we need to do so in a way that doesn't kill of what meager semblance of growth we have.

On failure

2012-01-30T12:00:00.000-08:00

So I opened the third bastard child of my keyboard just now, scrolled to the end and was met with a feeling of abstract failure, which has forced my keystrokes online.

I actually started writing nine years ago and in that time and brought two pieces of work to their conclusion and am about a third through a third. There are various other scribbles here and there and yet more ideas. Its actually an okay amount of work given I have, in that time, got a degree, started an increasingly successful career, got to a decent level of fitness and had a pretty good time doing all that (on that note- Ah, hello Mr Rioja).

Nevertheless, unlike with job applications, where my seldom victories have counted heavier than the multitudes of my defeats, my attempts at writing have been less successful even than Ed Milliband's leadership of the Labour party (quite an accurate comparison in fact. Both are more or less entirely fictional, harbour aspirations of profoundity and frankly just sound odd).

I do not doubt that the rejection of my spawn thus far has been entirely justified, but given the reported challenges of getting published, I don't think I would know if they weren't.

So, why the failure? I guess the distractions listed above count, as do others (addiction to current affairs, tv/films/dvds, and cleaning my flat to name but three. Medieval total war 2 was also a evil distraction for a while). But other problems condemn my scribblings to infrequency and mediocrity.

1) I find writing exhausting. Words have seldom flown from me, especially descriptive ones.
2) I am both obsessive and cursed by a terrible attention span for things that I don't "have" to do. I therefore avoid writing.
3) I prefer writing by hand to typing, but can't read my handwriting.
4) I write best at the same time as I cook best, run best and work best
5) I have a profound faith that at some point I will make it, somehow. This eliminates any sense of urgency.

I shall not propose solutions to any of the above, I'm bored of writing now, hungry and do not think it urgent enough.

State of the nation

2012-01-28T05:09:00.000-08:00

Okay, I have been a terrible blogger. Not a blogger at all in fact. But I have new years resolution and I will stick to it.

So, here is an inaugural post for 2012; a statement on the state of things.

1) Writing
I have written a few words today, but 2011 was a poor year for writing. My fortnightly non-working days have been swallowed by cleaning the house and general laziness. My evenings by irrelevant tv. I still have too many ideas and too little energy and struggle to manage more than 500 words at a stretch.
My aim to be be more regular and perhaps explore new ways- talk/type software being one- of getting words on paper. I would handwrite then type up, but I have appalling handwriting.

2) Work
Awesome. Brilliant year in 2011 and 2012 has started out very well indeed. Dementia much higher public and political profile- they like us because we won. I'm doing well job wise too.

3) Politics and economics
I don't know. We have a Government which is pushing forward an agenda that is so blatantly ideological rather than pragmatic. The wins secured by my party are hollow and minor and overshadowed by our partners on almost every front. Message from inside Government is a lack of joined up thinking and poor coordination.
I despise Labour's lip-service to prudence and its use to disguise their deep seated Keynesian-ism, but the LDs divisions are stark and open. Their small p politics even worse- as if we can both be a party of Government and one of opposition at once. That doesn't work with less than 10% of the Parliament.

4) Economics
The economics of our time perhaps dictate we continue with the cuts. Europe is groaning under the burden of debt and austerity which combined seem set to slowly diminish the continent. I don't feel we can borrow more and be seen as economically viable.
There has been no great explosion of the private sector resulting from cuts to the public, the Government lacks any real thought on how to instigate growth and the policies it implements seem strangely abstract from the problem (for example, US has massive innovation and reasonable levels of growth, despite high corporation tax rate. What do we do- cut corporation tax- did we assess how much benefit it would have- was it really a major factor inhibiting growth?)
Capitalism was never designed to make the poor wealthy, so perhaps progressives should seek to revision its aim into achieving this. Simplification of taxation, commitment to break up monopolies, empowerment of access to markets, to jobs, to wealth creation and to opportunity for growth- these should be our aims.

5) Religion
Meh. Give a fuck. Except when they go homophobic or get involved in politics, then become atheist. Disestablishment of CofE is needed.

6) Personal life
All fine and dandy thanks.

Next blog post will be last day of 31 Jan/1 Feb.

State of play

2011-06-22T14:18:00.000-07:00

So

One book "Seven days" written. Mainly crap. No hope getting it published without an entire re-write.

Another book "What Comes After" still with some sizeable problems. Unsure of publishability. Keeps on getting rejected (last tried a while back- now need new laser printer cartridge). Probably needs a decent edit. Also need to learn to write a synopsis.

Third book- 21k words in (guesing just under a third). Better, cleaner, sharper. Still rubbish bits and some characterisation/oh my god I have too many character issues.

Few other ideas- retirement city (ala Ballard), corporatist space future monster, spy/political thriller thing with failed politician. All lacking ordiginality a bit, but hey.

Still failing to write enough, either due to lack of time or energy. Or TV/reading economist/fiction/having a life/alcohol.

Will aspire to write here regularly (hopefully next post in less than 11 months...)

Leaden skies6

2010-07-11T03:43:00.000-07:00

"By the time they reached the Vickers’ field even Stephen was heavily impeded by the weight of the mud on his boots. It hadn’t rained this heavily since the pandemic and there was undoubtedly going to be flooding, stopping what little traffic there was on the roads. Almost a decade of disrepair meant many of the drains were blocked or broken, magnifying the rain’s impact. Stephen had heard that in some of the towns and cities blocks of flats had begun to collapse where too little had been done to keep them in order.

The tractor now lay still, though its driver remained at the wheel and the engine was running. Its heavy wheels had done extensive damage to the field and hedgerows. Stephen could see where it looked as if earlier the machine had almost got stuck in ditch, giant tyre marks had ripped up the soil and the surrounding bushes were coated with muck.

He raised a hand at Vickers as the old man looked back at them and they approached up the incline. Stephen looked over at Vickers’ house through the hedge. He could see the old man’s wife and two of his three daughters standing viewing the scene from part of their landscaped garden. It was a good thing that Richard had decided not to take the tractor over towards the house.

Stephen stood for a moment a few feet behind Vickers to give himself time to catch his breath.

“Anthony.” He said in greeting as Myles struggled up behind him.

Vickers didn’t turn round or answer.

“Piss poor weather we’re having.” Stephen continued standing next to Vickers and looking ahead at the tractor.

“I don’t give a bloody damn about the weather. I just want to know what the hell is going on with that man.”

“Though if the weather wasn’t as bad he’d never have done so much damage.” Myles said from beside them and Stephen smothered a smile with a scratch of his stubble. Vickers glared at the younger man who scuffed a muffled apology.

Anthony Vickers was tall and thin with a predatory face and eyes, which had held him in good stead in the time when he’d been a magistrate. His complexion was sullen and pale, but not unhealthy. He had retained most of his hair, which had gone a distinctive colour of white at an early age.

“How long has he been in there?” Stephen asked as he looked on the damage.

“It must be getting on an hour now. He’s just been sitting there for the last fifteen minutes, which I suppose must be a good thing.” Anthony replied with a suck of his teeth.

“Any idea what’s going on with him? How was he when he arrived?” Stephen asked focusing his gaze on the tractor.

“Not a bloody clue...he was quiet when he got here, but he’s always quiet. Could you go talk to him? He’s probably closer to you, such that he’s close to anyone.”

“He’s closest to Michael.” Stephen replied looking at his boot.

“I know, but he’s not at the pub, no idea where he’s got to.” Anthony replied looking away, as if uncomfortable admitting that he’d sought the pub landlord’s help before Stephen’s.

“Probably buying some ‘produce’” Myles butted in, but was ignored by both men.

“Okay, I’ll give it a shot.” Stephen ventured before beginning to step forwards towards the tractor.

“Er Stephen...” Myles started up from behind “Might be an idea to leave that. Don’t want him getting the wrong impression.” he pointed to the rifle in Stephen’s hand.

Stephen didn’t reply, but handed over the rifle over. He was pleased he still had his gralocking knife on him.

He rested his hand on the door handle of the cab and paused. In front of his face his breath was just visible. The sight of it forced a chill down his spine.

As he pulled the handle he had images of Richard shifting the tractor forwards, pulling him to the ground and then under the wheels. Instead Richard sat in the cab, staring blandly forwards. There was the hint of tears in her eyes.

“What...what...er...seems to be the problem Richard?” Stephen tried. Richard continued to look ahead. Stephen stepped up to bring himself more level.

“Look, I see there’s something going on, we could talk about it...perhaps here or...on the ground. Away from the tractor.”

“Dad’s taken a downhill turn.” Richard said without flinching.

“I’m sorry to hear that. Maybe we can talk about it with the engine off.” Stephen said, staring at Richard’s foot on the accelerator.

“He hasn’t moved in days.” Richard said after a pause, his eyes darting down for a moment.

“Well, we can talk about...” Stephen began and then stopped. Though confined to his chair, Richard’s father was never still. The old man shifted and rocked, glancing at echoes as the remnants of his hearing played tricks on his dying mind. That he had not moved meant something.

“Not moved at all?” Stephen asked, still imagining the tractor lurching off.

“No. He just sits there, blankly staring into space.” Richard replied, taking his hands on the wheel for a moment.

Richard’s life spent looking after his father and death, even in this harder and colder world, was a seldom occurrence in the village. For a moment, he stood unmoving on the step, watching Richard. He doubted his diagnosis of the situation, doubted Richard’s understanding.

“Perhaps we should go see him.” Stephen asked, looking past Richard out the side of the cab.

Richard paused and nodded, then looked down and rose from the seat. Stephen squeezed back and allowed Richard to step down from the tractor.

Stephen paused and looked at the key in the ignition. For a moment he considered taking it out, but left it instead, following Richard down the steps from the cab.

As he led Richard away from the tractor he signalled to Anthony to deal with the tractor. One of the other men came forwards nonchalantly and climbed up to switch off the engine. As he climbed down, Myles said something and they both looked over at the hunched figure Stephen was leading away and laughed. Stephen shot both men a dark glance."

Re-write of first book part4

2010-06-16T14:34:00.000-07:00

Here be some more from the re-write of my first book (which ended up called Seven days, but it needs another title). Have to say, this is the thing I'm enjoying writing most. Mainly as its full of filth...Fuck it if its unpublishable!

"Inside, I put the kettle on for tea and pasta and take a tin of tuna from my cupboard and tub of ready-made cheese sauce from the fridge (I think it is mine). Reaching up for the tuna is a task as I feel my stomach seeking a second round of dispute with its contents (or lack thereof).

In a few minutes I have a pan of pasta, tuna and cheese sauce and a mug of fresh, strong but very milky coffee, laced with sugar (which, as it is fair-trade is unbleached, a fact which to me indicates laziness more than any sense of environmentalism).

For a second time I step out onto my balcony into the rising heat of the day. Positioned on a cheap, green plastic sun lounger I put small forkfuls of cheesy tuna pasta into my mouth and chew slowly and thoroughly before swallowing. My eye throbs like a red warning light informing me that I’ve probably popped a blood vessel. With luck it will be one hiding in the corner so I won’t have to develop some awkward lie for Fran’s family.

The pasta and coffee are virtually cold before I manage to convince my stomach to cease their cramps. Victorious, I put the remnants of both aside and look out at the flats opposite.

Where I live is the English attempt at modern attractive riverside apartments; lots of glass, angular lines and manicured open spaces in neatly paved courtyards. Of course, the river which they are beside is the Thames, the banks of which are mostly lined with warehouses, a cement factory and developments wholly out of keeping with either their peers or their predecessors. The overall impact is to make this bit of Wandsworth and Fulham opposite feel oh so slightly of the second world. I’m glad I’m renting here, rather than owning.

As my senses begin to regain the perception of feelings other than pain, I raise myself from the lounger pan in hand and return inside the flat. For a moment I contemplate picking up the bucket and dealing with it, but don’t bother. It can wait until I’m back from Fran’s.

***

Its now nearing 6.30 in the morning and I opt to retire to the bathroom to continue my humanisation. If I wait much longer one of my housemates may drift from their slumber into reality, stumble into the bathroom and deny my bowels their opportunity to evacuate themselves.

I take up residence and bolt the door. A copy of the New Statesman lies by the toilet and I browse its nanny-statist pages, full of gibberish about the Third World. An article jumps out at me, advocating a line of argument one of my housemates recently subjected me to. I note his unoriginality and flick through the remnants of the magazine with disinterest.

Following my business I turn to the shower. Normally I like the heat of the water to virtually scold my skin, but the raising heat outside, coupled with my hangover, convince me to moderate the temperature down. The shower, sadly, is in its usual state of mild but offensive filth.

It is a common misconception that semen is soluble in water. Years of living with other men (I never in the shower and certainly wouldn’t now) has taught me the substance is indeed troublesome to deal with using water alone, especially in an environment with limited drainage. Furthermore semen acts as an effective binding substance with hair. I depart the bathroom as quickly as possible; I struggle with such things when I’m at my most robust, which is not now.

From the bathroom I tiptoe back to my room, now feeling the tiredness resulting from a mere couple of drunken hours of sleep. In truth, I am most likely still severely intoxicated but the lack of sleep is now my most current sensation, merged with a screaming headache. Somewhere in a drawer there is an almost illegal supply of ibuprofen, paracetamol and diclophenac. I rummage greedily though my bedroom cabinet for the tablets and take a fistful (I’m not neurotic enough to abide by the recommended dose for these things. It is significantly more preferable to overload so they actually have an effect).

Back in my I try and get some more sleep in the time before I have to leave. Sadly the headache, unaffected by the painkillers and caffeine intake means I only doze slightly, drifting through reality into surreality, but not quite moving into dreaming or real sleep. After some while of this unsatisfactory somnolence I hear movement amongst outside my door and any hope of further sleep slips away (university halls were a curse for me).

Eventually I give up trying to sleep and reach for my laptop, eager to counteract the still resident hangover with a shot of testosterone induced endorphins."