The Beak

For my next trick...

2010-06-30T13:11:00.004-04:00

By crikey that Tim's a cunning man. Prior to the election in November a number of the candidates wanted his head on a plate and a number of those got voted in. If the pre-election chatter made him nervous then he must have been crapping himself when the results came in. Or perhaps he just coolly surveyed his opponents with a contemptuous eye in the comfort of knowing his contract of employment would be twice the shield against any puny arrows than might be shot his way.

Whatever the case, it takes a fair bit of skill to turn apparent hostility into a handshake on a two year contract extension. We might have expected him to trot off somewhere else more interesting but perhaps he rather enjoys the challenge of subtle manipulation. Having pulled off a couple of couple of pretty big stunts in the form of this extension and the previous superheads ruse, we wait with bated breath to see what's next. Of course the stunts have to get bigger and better and perhaps to get in on the fun we should set him challenges. The Beak suggests an attempt to jump over eight people in a fully loaded truck using a door stop as a ramp. The real part of the trick is convincing eight people to lie behind the ramp...

Click here to comment on this post on The Nest

Rename Their LegAssy

2010-06-09T12:50:00.003-04:00

"Death and taxes and childbirth! There is never a convenient time for any of them!", cried Scarlett O' Hara in Gone With the Wind. How very true, and it's perhaps a thought shared by our incumbent council: people are always going to complain about taxes, so we may as well raise them (and introduce an extra one for good measure). And voilà. Or maybe it's not their reasoning at all; there may never be a convenient time for taxpayers, but there is certainly more of a convenience scale for politicians. As a general rule, tax raising measures tend to become more inconvenient as the politician approaches an election.

How convenient, then, that our members have decided to raise taxes early on in their term, when there is still three and a half years left for the electorate to forget all about it (and as the election of Member Edwards Sr shows, we the electorate here have a very short memory). Now, far be it from me to accuse them of timing the tax hike with re-election in mind, I don't think they're that cold and calcula... Well, let's just say they didn't time it with re-election in mind.

The fact remains that there is a good chance that this tax raise is forgotten come next election, and for such a influential measure to be struck from members' political legacy would be a great shame. In fact, I struggle to think of any other measures they could approve that will have more of an impact on people's lives than this one, so it's fair to say that this should be the defining action of their tenure at Gilbert House. To this end, I propose that their LegAssy is renamed accordingly, so that in three and a half years' time people will freshly remember this council as the one that raised taxes for the poorest and made it more expensive for companies to employ people. During a time of global economic recession.

And this is where you, loyal Beak reader, can participate. The Beak is holding a competition for the most appropriate new name for the incumbent LegAssy, a name that will be dutifully adhered to by The Beak in future pieces. The prize: a much sought after "I am the Beak" t-shirt, design to be confirmed. And the pleasure of knowing that you are wittier than all the other disgruntled taxpayers, of course.

As for the name, anything goes really, you may want to go for something similar to the current name like TaxAssy, or LoonAssy, or you may want something more to the point, like ""Tobacco, Wage & Alcohol Tax Surge", although that would probably have to be an acronym. The possibilities are endless.

The deadline for entries will be 4:30pm on Wednesday 30th of June, emailed to The Beak's email address. You can enter anonymously, but then you wouldn't get the T-Shirt if you won, which would be very sad.

Other than that, good luck!

Click here to comment on this post on The Nest

Legally robbing poor Bennies

2010-05-27T19:46:00.006-04:00

The budget proposals are out and while much of the content was probably unavoidable I was suprised by the multi-pronged attack government is making on the lower income earners and the private sector.

Lowering the personal allowance by two thousand pounds perhaps seemed an easy win and is also somewhat difficult to argue against on first consideration, however when the lower tax band too is lowered by a thousand pounds, it becomes clear that the main point of this budget (from a tax point of view) will be to squeeze as much money as possible out of the lower paid while keeping those on more significant salaries paying little more. The tax bill for someone with a salary in the low to mid teens will significantly increase - this in a country which has a high cost of living as it is - while someone with a salary in the 50-60K bracket not only has a much lower increase in percentage terms but the affordability of the tax increase for those more blessed is of course much higher.

Adding on the "popular tax" of MSL (more of that lunacy later) someone earning £14K now has to find an extra £560 per year just to pay their tax bill. That will seem a paltry sum when viewed from the lofty financial perches most of the councillors enjoy but to a single person scraping by it is a significant cost, particularly when the you look at all the other costs they have to bear, many of which also look set to be significantly increased. Compare that to someone on £60K: yes, I know they pay more tax anyway (that's how the tax system works) but their burden under the new regime will increase by a mere £1,170 - so they'll earn just over four times the salary but suffer only double the tax increase? In what twisted financial way is that a fair and equitable increase, paticularly in these difficult times?

It has been some time since The Beak has taken to his high horse, keeping up with the local scene while travelling is never easy, but while we're up here let's have a quick chat about MSL as well. We are constantly told this was a popular tax before its abolition in the nineties and everyone feels we should pay it. "Popular" tax, my feathered arse - there is no such thing. Some people say it's a fair tax because everyone uses the medical service. By the same token, everyone uses the education system so, if that's your argument, shouldn't we have an education levy too? The MSL will raise £660,000 per year according to the Director of Corporate Treasures but that is just bollocks too, isn't it? It should raise about £165,000 from the civil service - but then we will be giving them a 1% pay rise so that doesn't really count this year - and The Beak wonders if FIG is counting the 1.5% they should be contributing? If so, then that's another £275,000 gone from the pot, - no matter what sort of financial wizardry is used which says FIG can contribute to FIG, it is money going around in circles however you paint it. That leaves just over £200,000 from the private sector which is hardly going to save the medical department. (Although as they are only paying for two doctors at the moment the costs must be plummeting anyway - but that's another story!)

By comparison, how much would a small percentage rise on the upper tax bracket have raised? Or even, God forbid, a higher tax bracket after the 26% bracket of say 30%. No one wants to see the sort of super tax they had in the UK a few years ago but let's be realistic, the more you earn the more tax you can afford, so the more you pay - that is just the way it is. Or at least the way it should be!

The councillors have had a couple of days to deliberate since the proposals were announced and The Beak has wings and legs crossed that tomorrow's news will be better...

Click here to comment on the post on The Nest

It's all in the name

2010-03-01T10:36:00.002-03:00

I felt a subtle but unmistakable loosening of my bowels when the Edwards double act was elected in November. It wasn't necessarily anything personal: I didn't feel comfortable having a husband/wife combo elected in 2001, fearing family loyalties could dominate rational decision making, and I still don't believe that a father/daughter team on council is any more healthy. And, quite frankly, the concept of "three for the price of two" touted last year scared the bejaysus out of me. But that's democracy for you.

It was the non-elected Edwards from Fox Bay that set the alarm bells ringing over the weekend though. In a letter to the Penguin News she expressed her outrage at apparent Argentine manipulation of the name of the Malvina House Hotel and invited Islanders to come up with a new title for the establishment. "Let's change the name" she urged, "and stop the dirty Argies from thinking we are proud of the name Malvinas". Or words to that effect.

It may seem a harmless suggestion and even sensible to those who regularly find themselves having to explain to visitors the difference between Malvina, the woman for whom the building is named (a Celtic name, incidentally, meaning 'handmaiden') and "Malvinas", the name Argentina uses for the Falklands.

However, the underlying message contained within Norma's letter is far more worrying, particularly if she has the ear of her Honourable family members, that in order to get the pro-British message across to Argentina we should sacrifice what possibly makes the Falklands the Falklands and not simply some English village which happens to lie 8,000 miles from London.

The history and culture of a country are inexorably linked to language and to suggest that we start to sever linguistic ties with South America in case the Argies get the wrong idea, is ludicrous.

What about "che" (or "chay", depending on your spelling preference) or "pasolibre", or even "Camp"? Should we do away with these staple expressions simply because they reveal not only our geographical location but also our historic links with the continent? A number of years ago the Penguin News published a series of Falklands words which had been compiled by a team of volunteers and even I with my failing memory can recall the entertainment and pride it caused. It proved we had a language of our own to be preserved, including gems like "palinky."

However, if Norma has her way, a work of historic revision could sort out all those pesky place names, particularly on East Falkland, which hint at a Spanish blemish somewhere in our history - such as Laguna Isla, Paragon and Bombilla - which could all be wiped off the map and replaced with suitable English toponymy.

Anyone fancy Upper and Lower Wibble in place of the San Carloses?

Click here to comment on this post on The Nest

Law passed, things expected to stay pretty much the same

2010-02-26T13:10:00.001-03:00

After months of rumblings and tremors, the imminent oil exploration and the Falklands were last week cast onto the media spotlight amid a newsprint ejaculation of scaremongering, exaggeration and conjecture that couldn't have been more sensationalistic if it had included Dad's Army's Private Frazer exclaiming "We're doomed!" after every article.

All it took was a new Argentine law that requires ships that sail via here from or to Argentina to obtain a licence. Irritating, perhaps, but hardly the harbinger of an apocalypse that newspapers would have us believe. Dare I use an example applicable to today's youth and suggest that if all this was going on on Facebook, the law would be little more than a snide Argentine comment under the Falklands' status.

Sadly, this is not the way it has been portrayed in the British press. The Daily Mail, being the bastion of balanced and restrained reportage that it is, was unsurprisingly irate at the decision and pointed out that "The announcement means Argentina will be able to control all traffic from South America towards the islands". An insightful point and one that gives plenty cause for concern. Not concern for the impact that this will have on the Islands, mind, but concern for the fact that a mainstream newspaper is struggling to get to grips with the concept of countries, continents and the general geography of South America.

The Sun, evidently harking back to the days of the Belgrano, remained true to type and barely stopped short of declaring all-out war. "Falklands Oil Argy-Bargy Sparks 1982 re-run" ran the headline, with news of a destroyer steaming for the Falklands. "The Naval mission will evoke memories of Rod Stewart's song Sailing, which became associated with the Falklands War after being used as the theme tune to a BBC documentary about the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal.", it went on to add. The tragedies of war are many, some tangible others not so, but none could surpass the downright abomination of Rod Stewart getting more airplay.

"Plea for Navy to break Argentine Falklands 'siege'" blazed The Express, without, amazingly, connecting it to Diana's "accidental" death. "Cheryl Cole quits UK" screamed the Star, which doesn't have anything to do with the Falklands, admittedly, but it makes for more interesting reading and I suspect, is higher up on the list of things to care about for most people in the Falklands. After all, is the latest Argentine move really that unexpected?

Picking on papers for being ignorant and sensationalistic is like shooting fish in a barrel though; newspapers are a business after all and tabloid editors didn't get to where they are by running headlines along the lines of: "Law passed, things expected to stay pretty much the same".

The problem is, however, that much like during the 25th anniversary celebrations, a media backlash always follows, and it wasn't long before pieces that weren't so sympathetic to the Islands' cause began to appear in the papers. It is of no surprise that many (if not most) people in UK are at best indifferent towards the Islands, and at worst see it as a piece of an anachronistic empire or, even worse, Maggie's greatest hour. Few understand the self-determination argument, or the fact that we are everything but a retrogade colony; Viceroy-esque garden parties at Government House notwithstanding. Yes, I know it was for charity and simply down to unfortunate timing, but did the camera crews have to be invited? It couldn't have looked more colonial if they had been playing croquet. Oh, wait, they were.

Similarly, the proliferation of Facebook groups such as "Argentina: just FUCK OFF and leave the Falklands in peace" is unlikely to further our cause but could do much to damage it. We have to learn to respond to Argentine taunting with either an aloof silence or a succinct presentation of the facts. The Chinese water torture method seems the most effective; childish stamping of feet or flicking of fingers achieves nothing.

Either way, it seems that we are very much losing the PR battle; the recent Rio summit being a case in point. An accidental re-reading of part of The Last of the Pink Bits, British journalist Harry Richie's account of his travels round the remnants of the British Empire in the eighties, produced this passage, which, while about Gibraltar seems to The Beak to sum up the nub of the problem that the Falklands has in respect of both the British press and, more generally, world opinion:

"...he (the editor of a Gibraltarian newspaper) was far less confident that people back in Britian really understood the contemporary politics of colonialism, especially the desire of the colonised to remain colonised. Fair point, but one that conveniently avoided the fact that few people in Gibraltar seemed able to specify what colonial or post colonial future they wanted, beyond mentioning the attractive and attractively vague catchword, 'self-determination.' "

When are we going to be able express a clear idea of our future hopes in language that The Sun and the rest of the world can understand?

Click here to comment on this post at The Nest

Eyes wide shut

2010-02-09T12:46:00.004-03:00

Among the significant dates which may have passed unnoticed by readers of The Beak is February 2nd, which is celebrated in the USA and Canada as Groundhog Day, when the emergence from hibernation of a small beaver-like creature is taken as an excuse for all sorts of craziness. Since 1993 and the screening of a film called Groundhog Day starring Bill Murray as a TV reporter who gets stuck in time while reporting this event, the expression has come to mean something akin to a rather severe case of déjà vu.

Something of the sort may have happened recently at Penguin News, which in dewy-eyed enthusiasm for a British Antarctic Survey director’s suggestion that the Falklands should be marketed to tourist as a gateway to the Antarctic recently gushed, “A fresh pair of eyes is often all it takes to identify improvements or opportunities, which may otherwise have been obscured by the clouds of over-familiarity”.

While not wishing to pour the ice-cold water of reality on any proposal which might support the urgent need for the development of the Dockyard site, The curmudgeonly and cynical Beak, takes a different view of the BAS proposal.

The sad fact is that since Argentina banned charter flights from carrying expedition ship passengers to the Falklands, unless you belong to the British Antarctic Survey, have enough money to charter a yacht, or are a VIP on a jolly, getting to the Antarctic from the Stanley is well-nigh impossible and it would be dishonest to suggest otherwise.

True, a very small percentage of the thousands of cruise ship passengers who spend a day in Stanley may be bound for the Antarctic, or have just returned from there. Those that go to the Antarctic on expedition ships, as opposed to sailing past in floating gin palaces, have already paid thousands of dollars for the privilege. They not only get to set foot on the White Continent, but also, on the way, those that are not laid low by sea sickness, are lectured on its every aspect, by world-class experts. The creation of an Antarctic interpretative centre in Stanley, while of educational value to school children and of possible interest to local residents, would make very little or no impact on tourist numbers.

Another sad, but inescapable fact is that for Antarctic tourists, who may or may not pass through the Falklands, the principal gateway to their icy dreams is Ushuaia in Southern Argentina, which has the advantage of being accessible by means of frequent daily flights and is also a whole day’s sailing nearer, a significant cost-reducing factor for ship operators in the current economic crisis.

If the Falklands had an opportunity to be a gateway to anywhere, it was to South Georgia, a magical island, stuffed full with wild life, history and romance, with which the Falklands has real historical connections. South Georgia is also a full day’s sailing nearer to Stanley than Ushuaia. Before Kirchner’s jackboot descended on charter flights some success seemed to be being achieved in the development of the Falklands as a departure point for South Georgia cruise ships making Stanley a real and economically very significant gateway.

A fresh pair of eyes may be all very well, but as is being discovered in many aspects of Falklands life, if these new eyes are blinkered, simply ignorant of the realities of our situation, or determined to ignore the lessons of past experience, they may as well be shut.

Click here to comment on this post at The Nest

United we fall

2010-01-27T07:22:00.002-03:00

There is an old adage: "United we stand, divided we fall", wise words indeed but the events of November 5 would appear to bely this.

The previous council made quite a show of always presenting a united front, regardless of the debate which went before. Very admirable apparently, but it leaves the voter only one place to turn to when it comes time to mark the ballot paper.

Of course the previous council had the misfortune to have a number of issues of concern for the voter to deal with, not least the "Global Economic Downturn" (to coin a phrase) but it would appear that the most upsetting to the average voter was the reformation of Government (or whatever it was called) and its associated cost. On the QT I have yet to find a councillor from the previous bunch who did not have reservations with the re-organisation. Yet it was passed by Exco so they must have held a discussion and presumably a vote in GPC beforehand. Clearly then some of them must have supported it and supported it strongly enough to carry the motion.

Once council has made a decision it is absolutely right that from then on the individual members should do their level best to make that decision work whether they approved or not. However, by the same token they should not be afraid of saying, and saying publicly, that they disagreed with the decision and it should arguably be a matter of public record how individual councillors voted on any particular issue. This then allows democracy to work properly and for voters to make their mark based on individual performance rather than personal knowledge or indeed, perhaps, family allegiance.

The previous council insisted on having a 'spokesperson' to relay the decisions to the populace. Unfortunately the style of delivery frequently sounded condescending and over the four years many voters started to feel isolated. The series of unpopular decisions which had to be made, both in Stanley and Camp, and lack of dialogue with the voter coupled with the apparent unanimity meant more and more voters felt that the only way to get any progress was wholesale change. This surely offers a salutary lesson for the current council.

The united front approach fails diplomatically in two important areas: firstly it does not give credit to councillors who fought against, but ultimately failed to change, an unpopular decision, but also and perhaps more importantly it allows councillors who vote for an unpopular decision, or for that matter against a popular one, to hide behind the corporate façade if they wish to.

There are apparently some fairly major disagreements on policy within Gilbert House at the moment, but once the cards have been laid on the table for this latest budget session will we know who, for example, fought for or against individual cuts? Come the next polling day it may be the only thing which sees them re-elected.

More a case, perhaps, of "United, they fell."

Click here to comment on this post on The Nest

A balanced budget?

2010-01-23T13:14:00.004-03:00

According to Jan Cheek a balanced budget tops the Councillors' list of priorities. Therefore under current circumstances of reduced investment and fishing income we can expect this to mean that either FIG spending is going to be reduced and/or taxes and charges will be raised.

With the worldwide economic downturn it is perhaps easy to begrudgingly agree that these are our ways of experiencing the pain that everyone else in the world is suffering. However when something on the horizon suggests I might suffer pain, I'm quick to scurry about in search of reasons to avoid it.

Following the Wall Street crash in 1929, the Hoover administration obsessed with maintaining a balanced budget; in doing so they raised taxes and cut spending. It is now recognised that there could hardly have been better policies for driving the US economy deeper into recession. A better strategy would have been to cut taxes and maintain or increase spending. Whether economists unanimously agree on that or not I don't know but given the massive deficit that the UK government, and others, are running this would seem to hold some water.

In the Falklands, government spending probably makes up a large part of the economy and therefore any reduction in that spending can be expected to have a significant impact on the economy so it is therefore likely that budget cuts would have the depressing effect that they had in Hoover's time.

Running a budget deficit would mean using some of the reserves, which we are told are there for a rainy day. Well if it isn't raining now, what is it doing? Note as well that a deficit means using reserves and not in fact borrowing which is how most other governments manage deficits.

By this time next year we'll probably know whether or not oil is here and that's another reason not to make things too painful now. Of course it will probably be a number of years before royalties start to flow but if we know they are on the way then taking a bit of the reserves in the interluding years would hardly be the work of Beelzebub. If there's no oil then of course we'll have to whip ourselves severely for being so extravagant this year but I think I'd prefer to suffer pain when it's clearly necessary rather than “just in case”.

Click here to comment on this post at The Nest

Feathering The Nest

2010-01-19T17:47:00.004-03:00

Watching the development (and degeneration) of discussions on here over the last couple of months from my elevated perch, it has become clear that there is an appetite for a proper discussion forum dedicated to Falklands issues. Blogs are not a good place to have a two way discussion: it is difficult to follow conversations and impossible to see if there have been any new comments unless you have a magical head for numbers or, of course, you subscribe.

So, as FIG cannot seem to get organised enough to do it - and really, why should they? - The Beak in its magnanimous role has decided to open and run a discussion forum. The link is at the bottom of this post - we shall call it The Nest.
This forum will allow anonymous posting, but you should register if you wish to contribute meaningfully; you will be asked for an email address when you register but you do not have to use your real one, or alternatively you could make one up on gmail/yahoo/msn etc for your online presence.

There is the potential for this forum to expand: new categories can easily be created and if people join properly then they can create new topics and start off their own discussions without waiting for The Beak to throw an intellectual bone.

It would be nice if people would try and keep things civil and sensible (you do not have to be constructive!) but knowing the way these things tend to go I am sure some conversations will degenerate into bitchy little arguments and someone will inevitably shit in The Nest, as it were. The Beak will be watching and if a conversation shows signs of becoming too nasty (or just plain boring) then it will be closed.

You will also notice that there has been a category specifically dedicated to discussing posts from The Beak, this has all the current comments added and comments will no longer be accepted on The Beak.

To get to The Nest click the link or type thenest.lefora.com into your browser.

Click here to comment on this post at The Nest

God bless the initiative

2010-01-15T08:22:00.000-03:00

I had quite forgotten about the small notice in the PN to say that the BBC would be back on local FM but by chance this morning I cranked the dial to 106 in a moment of unconscious fiddling.

You can imagine how delighted I was to hear the smooth eloquence of the BBC delivering the news. I found the experience so intellectually uplifting that after just a few minutes I actually cooked breakfast by simply thinking about it and using the energy from excess IQ.

If Stuart isn’t knighted for his initiative then at the very least I hope he’ll feel the warmth of the Lord’s smile.

In bringing back the BBC he's reminded me of a damn good lesson which I never quite seem to retain and practice: if you can do something about a problem then go to it, don't just sit in your armchair whinging. Perhaps its the enormity of all the problems that I'd like to solve that leaves me exhausted before I even get started on one of them and so I find the only task I can tackle is to moan, weakly.

I wonder what other joys in life might be brought about or problems solved if there were more people like Stuart and less like me. Not much peat was ever cut by sitting on ones hands expecting someone else to pick up the spade. Stuart of course wasn’t alone in bringing back the BBC but he started it and the point I’m trying to make is that the vital thing is the spark that starts the fire – no spark, no fire.

I haven't given it a lot of thought but the strength of a community to survive is probably based on people who will take the initiative; I doubt an enduring one has its idle whingers to thank.

With that in mind I'll now spring forth and strike down a problem...well, right after a short nap, all this thinking has left me a little tired.

Constructive cynicism

2010-01-08T15:58:00.001-03:00

The recent lack of posts belies the fact that the couple of weeks have been eventful for The Beak. Keen followers may have noticed the storm-in-a-teacup that brewed in the aftermath of the Demeaning article, but if you didn't, here's the gist of it: an accusation about an individual was made in an anonymous comment, counter accusations flew back and forth and somehow The Beak ended up getting blamed for it all. The Beak was forced to protest its innocence and close comments on the matter.

Nevertheless, a disgruntled reader followed up (or tried to) with a comment arguing that The Beak had taken a turn for the negative and had therefore lost his or her readership. This after two posts respectively praising a councillor and a decision that did away with needless bureaucracy. Tough crowd.

Around the same time, Dick Sawle mentioned The Beak in his Motion for Adjournment speech, but suggested it stick to positive and constructive criticism. Evidently, constructive criticism is going to be the buzzword of the Tens, everyone is using it. Even Roger Edwards bowed to pleas from a public meeting and made a concerted effort to start off on a positive note in his speech. What’s with the obsession with positive, constructive criticism all of a sudden? Is there really no place for cynical criticism?

Constructive criticism serves a purpose, I admit. One could have, say, written to the Speaker of the House pointing out that Gavin Short referring to the new Director of Community Safety as “Head Bobby” during a LegCo meeting was somewhat inappropriate and undermined Mr Finchett even before he arrives in the Islands. Furthermore, one could have said, perhaps Mr Short would like to use the correct title for heads of department in future, while representing the electorate at least. But, could one have commented on how it seemed to be a cheap and puerile dig at the Chief Executive and his restructure? Probably not, so cynicism too has a role to play.

Alternatively, The Beak could follow tack with the new Penguin News editor and go on a few weekend jollies in camp, write about what it means to be a Falkland Islander, and pepper the rest of the publication with granny-pleasing photos of face-painted kids. Come next November there could even be a commemorative issue, The Beak will charge people extra for it and accuse them of being un-Falkland Islander if they don’t buy it.

So no, The Beak will not be making any New Year’s resolutions to indulge in more positive, constructive criticism. Partly because cynical criticism is just as necessary in a democracy, but largely because The Beak was started as a satirical blog and as such, relies on cynicism and, believe it or not, humour.

Maybe one day the Falklands will have a House full of tax-dodging, expense-overclaiming MPs (governing and opposition) like Britain. Maybe one day The Beak will form part of that opposition and, without hint of an innuendo, refer to fellow MPs as Honourable Members. Perhaps then The Beak will make only positive and constructive criticisms. That day, however, is nowhere near, so apologies Mr Sawle and apologies disgruntled reader, but The Beak will not be dropping its cynical side just yet.

Jane Cameron – truly “the special one”

2009-12-27T17:20:00.001-03:00

The death of any person is difficult to bear for family and friends, more so, perhaps, if that death was caused by accident and our sympathies go out to all those in the Falklands for whom the festive season has been marred by bereavement.

After a typically spirited fight for life, following her involvement in an horrific road accident in Argentina, Jane Cameron left us on Boxing Day. I use the phrase “left us” advisedly because it seems that way to me.

There are some people whose untimely death affects not only family and friends, but seems to leave a hole in the very fabric of our small society. While I am too young to remember it personally, I am told that the loss of FIGAS pilot, Ian Campbell in the seventies left the whole country with a feeling of bereavement and while Jane’s activities were less high profile, I am sure that her absence will also be felt as deeply.

In other places there will deservedly be obituaries listing Jane’s many and varied contributions to the Falkland Islands. Here I would simply like to say that I cannot believe that we shall never again see her bouncing down Ross Road at the wheel of her little red car, nor ever again experience either her withering glare of disapproval or the sparkly-eyed warmth of her wicked grin. Forget such jumped-up self publicists as José Morinho; elegant, intellectual, fierce champion of Falklands traditions and people, avid consumer of TV soap operas, feared adversary of bureaucracy and loyal friend, for us in the Falklands Jane Cameron was truly “the special one”.

Red tapers struck down

2009-12-22T08:40:00.001-03:00

Dullards we are, one and all. Too busy we are crying and whinging about being choked by red tape that we fail to see small victories and rejoice in them. I refer to a notice in the back pages of the Penguin News of a few weeks ago informing us that we may now import a number of types of fruit without the need for the tedium of a pile of documentation, albeit with a few conditions.

For anyone returning from Chile, this has to be welcome news - if even for a few lemons for the G&T. Indeed for anyone who fears that we are drowning in rules and regulations, this must be something that gives the will to carry on, the strength to see another day through. How could we have let such an event pass with a mere mention in a government information notice? Poor, very poor.

Even Gavin Short, in his adjournment speech, chose to wave garlic at the impending fangs of bureaucracy rather than to hold aloft this small hope that we shall not be crushed by the red tapers. Perhaps a damning condemnation that he is indeed one of us - blind and too quick to complain.

He might have skipped across to Chile and bought 5kg of fruit just to bang it on the table in remonstration of those who like their rules and regulations. He might even have offered an apple to The Speaker, saying "Sir, you will taste no sweeter fruit. It has been brought to these Islands free from the poison of bureaucracy". But alas there were no such remonstrations and The Speaker didn't have his apple.

It seems we were all too caught up in drinking bitter whine, perhaps we've come to prefer the taste, that we missed the chance to sip from the cup of sweet victory. And now the event has passed I'm left to complain that I missed it - bitter whine does indeed have a strong grip...

Diddle Deemail

2009-12-19T16:50:00.002-03:00

The Diddle Dee Telegraph still works – some would say more effectively than Cable and Wireless - and occasionally brings good news from unexpected quarters. The Beak was cheered last week to discover by this medium that Sharon Halford, as one of the elected members for the Camp in this Council is now emailing all her constituents with regular reports on what she is doing on their behalf. Whether or not Sharon’s reports make riveting reading, the fact that she is sending them is a praiseworthy acknowledgement of her accountability to the people who put her where she is and, incidentally, dispels the belief held by at least one member of the previous assembly that such communication is “elitist.”

For too long, it seems, government has been constructing a hierarchical heap, presiding like a spider over a web of bureaucracy and regulation, more appropriate to the UK than to the Falklands. Let us hope piously that Sharon’s initiative is a sign that the tide is turning and is an acknowledgement that we are still living in a country where it is possible to deal directly with people rather than ciphers. Our population’s small size, at a tenth of the capacity of some football stadiums elsewhere, is often represented as a stumbling block to progress and development. This it may be in some respects, but it is also part of what makes this a community and not a vast multitude of strangers.

There has been no recent mention of the promised and long-awaited discussion forum, which was to have been part of the FIG web-site, but if the Penguin News report on last week’s public meeting is to be believed, and The Beak sees no reason not to, then it would appear that some members of our fledgling Council (FLEDGCO?) are beginning to take telecommunications seriously.

Nothing less was expected from “Cherno” Bill Luxton, whose seismic rumblings from foreign parts via the PN letters page have often touched upon the subject with the delicacy and tact we have come to expect from him. Nor has Dick Sawle made any secret of his feelings about what he considers to be the inadequacies and pocket-picking tendencies of our monopolistic internet service provider. At the public meeting Bill stated that getting out of what he described as our present “stone age” with regard to communications was “one of the most important things that’s facing this assembly” and Dick offered the opinion that if he and his colleagues did not act upon the Doyle report then they should be sacked.

A less positive chord was struck by Cllr Edwards the Elder with his rather strange outburst about "bloody email" during his motion for adjournment speech on Friday. Amusing though it was to hear him get a verbal slapping from the Speaker of the House, it is worrying that he regards what is arguably one of the single greatest leaps in communication since Mr Bell hollered "Watson, come here!" as a scourge which must be stamped out.

Improvement in telecommunications is not just a matter of allowing even more Westers to communicate via Facebook, should that be possible. Good and affordable islands-wide connectivity is of vital importance for there to be any hopes of commercial development, particularly in Camp, and councillors need to embrace every facet of modern communications if we are to have any hope of progressing past the antediluvian stage we are in now.

Demeaning

2009-12-16T07:28:00.001-03:00

With no shortage of rant-worthy issues soaking up The Beak's creative juices of late, it has taken over a week to put finger to keyboard regarding a recent feather-ruffling matter.

The case in question is a brief letter in the Your Questions Answered section (aka the civil servant letters page) of the December 4th Penguin News, asking if it was true that the staff carrying out the business end of the demining operation had never done such work before. It took a couple of minutes for the implications of this question to sink in: Complete novices. Handling 28 year old explosive devices. Could someone really think this was going on? They may as well have asked "Is it true that Bactec will be using the Irish demining technique (hands on ears, one foot stamping)?"

I don't want to make this about the R word, as I am certain (hopeful, at any rate) it isn't, but I can't help but think that such insulting and moronic questions would not be asked if it was an all-British cast doing the prodding and digging. Indeed, if there were any letters they would probably be lauding the de-miners' courage in the face of possible swift and emphatic dismemberment.

As an anonymous blog, The Beak is a prime example of lily-livered yellaness, and there is not enough money in the world to get me to crawl around on minefields looking for explosive devices. I have nothing but child-like admiration for these guys, and the fact that a member of the community thought that they were anything but professionals is the equivalent of seeing someone pissing on Superman's cape.

The general feeling around town regarding the demining operation is that it is somewhat needless and it would be put to much better use somewhere where mines are a real danger. Too true. But, regardless of the reasoning behind it, it's happening, and maybe we'd do well to show some gratitude or, at the very least, some respect. Even the curmudgeonliest cynic would be hard-pressed to find reasons as to why it isn't good for the Islands (Nº 1, it makes Argentina look bad) and if we never walk on those fields ever again, we've lost nothing.

Who knows? It may even prove to be cathartic

Falkland Islands News Network - Time to bomb it?

2009-12-09T16:15:00.011-03:00

Those of us in the Falkland Islands fortunate enough not only to get TV reception, but also to enjoy the varied range of channels offered by KTV, may have come across the satirical news programme, The Daily Show. This programme, which is broadcast by CNN and hosted by Jon Stewart uses a conventional news desk format to take an irreverent and sometimes hilarious look at the stories currently in the news.

Presumably to avoid legal action, but also for the benefit of any idiots who might be watching, the screening of The Daily Show is preceded by a disclaimer which states that the views expressed in the programme are not those of the broadcaster and have not been fully thought out. It also states that the presenter and the reporters featured are not journalists.

Sane regular readers of the Falkland Islands News Network (FINN), if there are any, and particularly anyone who has read an article of December 3rd entitled: Falklands’ Oil –Time to Defuse the Bomb, must surely be wondering why, if in the name of free speech we must permit this kind of incoherent dribble, it cannot also be preceded by a similar disclaimer.

The author, FINN’s agency chief, editor, reporter and tea trolly lady, J.Brock, who is also responsible for other electronic publications, such as Your Mental Health Magazine, says of a possible bonanza for the Falklands resulting from the forthcoming oil drilling programme by Desire Petroleum, “It’s a nice pipe dream, but no thanks.” Speak for yourself, J.Brock. Throughout its history, the Falkland Islands have not only welcomed, but, indeed, depended upon successive bonanzas. Where would we have been without the huge increase in ships failing to get round Cape Horn without damage from the mid 1840s until the opening of the Panama Canal, giving us the opportunity to condemn any vessel which had a useful cargo? Where would we have been without successive wars in Europe and elsewhere, to push up the demand for wool to make uniforms, during much of the first part of the twentieth century? Where are we now with the very squid that from the mid-eighties has turned us from a make-do-and-mend community into avid consumers of foreign travel, exotic nosh and wide-screen tellies, threatening to piss off for good?

We need another bonanza; the continuing growth of retail outlets in Stanley and the cost of the number of high-priced second-hand executives from the UK demands it. Tourism won’t do it, at least not if an aversion to catching foreign diseases kills off the cruise ship business and Argentina and the MOD continue to make it impossible for more than a handful of people to get here.

Of course, J.Brock, who older readers may remember as the infamous Jaunita Borck [sic], one time publisher and editor of the smudgily photocopied and often hilariously mis-spelled Teaberry Express, is entitled to express her views, but what is worrying is not that in this one instance she might be taken seriously, but that her views in general might be taken to be representative of those of the government or people of these islands. If we can’t legally gag her, or subject her to the same scrutiny that the Media Trust exercises over Penguin News and FIRS, a disclaimer might be the only answer.

To moderate or not to moderate

2009-12-08T18:06:00.005-03:00

It has been gratifying to see the number of comments on the posts so far: some witty, some insightful, some not. Unfortunately there will always be comments which take it a touch too far (just ask Rosemary Minto) which is why they are moderated on this blog.

There have been a couple of comments on the Severely bogged television thread which The Beak has declined to post, the main reason being that they are accusing a company in the Falklands of illegal activity for which they offer no real evidence. Negative comment is fine and opinions are free for everyone to hold, but accusations of illegal activity against a company while offering no evidence is not something the Beak is willing to publish (unless of course we are talking about the Government in which case, fair game).

Yesterday The Beak received the following comment on the above post: "I keep trying to inform people (via this blog) about [the company], but whoever is moderating this blog is refusing to publish them. I have a really good idea who is writing this blog and maybe I will use something that he can't moderate, like facebook, and I'll let the Falklands and it's [sic] government know who it is!"

Go for it, the internet is a wonderful place for freedom of speech and if you have something to say then crack on; blogs are very easy to set up and it might just give The Beak something else to write about. Although if, as the poster alleges, illegal activity is being carried out then perhaps going to the Police or AG's Chambers would be more appropriate than posting comments on The humble Beak

Undone by paragraph 12

2009-12-05T18:52:00.002-03:00

If like me you have no life and are simply killing time until the grim reaper takes his inevitable swing then you may have found yourself perusing Gazette Supplement number 12 of 2009 which accompanies Gazette number 17. Of course you will have noticed paragraph 12 of the Members’ Remuneration Bill 2009 which basically states that a Councillor may take his/her partner on one overseas trip per term of office at the expense of FIG.

The initial reaction might be one of mild outrage that Councillors should be entitled to such a perk; we expect them to work their fingers to the bone on our behalf and in return receive a modest payment sufficient to keep starvation at bay, but nothing more. If the holiday credit scheme became an unjustified cost then clearly this goes well into the “indefensible” category as well. At the very least one would expect it to be a taxable benefit in kind but unfortunately a sudden attack of apathy prevented me from studying the Taxes Ordinance to confirm.

In these times of pressure on the FIG budget, Councillors might have taken the opportunity to make some political capital with a noisy abolition of the entitlement. However the fact that it’s still there isn’t necessarily a bad thing as it serves as a useful test of Councillors’ ability to stay in touch with the electorate and not fall foul of the many traps that lead to alienation. If any Councillor took advantage of paragraph 12 in these current times, then it would surely be a very strong invitation not to vote for them at the next election, should they stand. In fact even if times were good, I think it would be frowned upon. Goodness knows how this perk came about but it really does seem entirely inappropriate. Perhaps a little like the MPs expenses claims in UK – many were perfectly within the rules but just morally wrong.

So perhaps it should stay on as a simple test of Councillors’ moral mettle and we’ll stand ready to scorn any who might weaken: “my goodness, Councillor X has invoked clause 12, pass me my ballot paper”. The phrase “hoist by his own petard” might well be replaced with “undone by paragraph 12”.

The delusion of choice

2009-12-04T07:48:00.002-03:00

Newly arrived residents and visitors to the Falklands could be forgiven for thinking that we enjoy a level of competition and choice in our retail market unusual for such a small population.

The much-publicised opening of the new West Store extension marked another battle in the seemingly endless war for our shopping baskets that FIC and the Chandlery continue to wage against each other. Waitrose, Sainsbury's... Never before have shelves offered so many UK household staples to so few. And yet, why does it feel like there is still an element of "like it or lump it" about food shopping in Stanley? And have things changed that much, really?

The opening of the new Chandlery this year marked something of an historic event, a custom built supermarket to compete with the FIC's West Store (and presumably with a fraction of FIC's financial resources). Sainsbury's product lines further promised to follow from where the old Beauchene had started with Tesco and, more importantly, now provide a cheaper alternative to everyday goods than the sometimes prohibitive Waitrose products of West Store.

Unfortunately, its stock seems to be irrational at the best of times. I've often found myself looking for a basic product only find that it either isn't in stock or if it is, the product is an anchovie-stuffed, chilli-marinated, organic, wheat-free, turtle-friendly version at £5 a jar as opposed to the usual 50p. I'm not an expert in the field, but one would expect that a basic requirement for anyone running a supermarket in the Falklands is to have a core list of basic goods that are always in stock.

Whoever does the ordering at the Chandlery doesn't seem to understand the annoyance of doing a weekly shop in one supermarket and then having to go to another to pick up, say, a tin of sweetcorn (yes, there are probably palletloads of sweetcorn in the Chandlery at the moment, but it's a random example I've picked to illustrate a point). Maybe they do understand the annoyance, maybe they are banking on us shoppers happily going to another shop for a tin of sweetcorn, maybe it's our fault for continuing with our shopping rather than walking out.

Meanwhile, for all its razzmatazz, the West Store extension seems to have brought little new with it other than more shelves and a car park that Salvador Dali would have been proud of. More crucially, prices don't seem to have changed, and while Waitrose products may be preferable to the barely-edible Nisa and Iceland fodder of old, one can't help but think that having a high-end product line simply makes it easier to disguise mark-ups. Maybe that's being unfairly cynical, but those of us who can still taste the creosote in the back of our throats simply find it difficult to trust the West Store and the colonial monopoly it enjoyed for decades.

For me, food shopping at the West Store is riddled with guilt and self-loathing. In fact, not entirely unlike that which one would expect after paying a prostitute to lose their virginity; it fulfills a basic need, but you wouldn't want other people to know that's how you were going about it.

Inevitably, until there is such a thing as a consumer watchdog in the Falklands (chance would be a fine thing...) if we want any of this to change it is up to the consumer. The most obvious action is to let them know - anonymously if need be - as it may well be that the management aren't aware of their shortcomings. Ultimately however, the most powerful means of protest for consumers is the chequebook, and if we are unhappy we should make an effort to go elsewhere to find the best price or quality, regardless of the annoyance and the extra pennies on petrol.

The opposition

2009-12-02T12:50:00.003-03:00

Submitted by The Beak follower "Rambunctious Penguin"

Having been voted out one might expect a former Councillor to get the hint and disappear into obscurity, at least for a while. It's somewhat tedious therefore to hear Mikey Mike point scoring at public meetings and trying to tell the Councillors what they should be doing via the pages of the Penguin News. I don't think either of these "public appearances" made him look good and they suggest that he has a certain contempt for the process of democracy that said his input wasn't necessary.

His point at the public meeting about the magistrate probably not being able to mediate on an informal basis was a good one, but the way in which it was presented clearly showed he's more interested in point scoring than in genuinely trying to contribute. So if we measure the score, let's say in sour grapes, then that's one to Mikey Mike.

The article in the Penguin News came across as an instruction and with the terms “European Union Green Paper” and “important political issues” used in close succession my immediate reaction was to read no further for fear of lapsing into a coma, and to snort with derision at the photograph of the man that the electorate said they had heard enough from.

However his obvious intent to snipe from the sidelines may be a useful tool: it will help to keep the new Councillors on their toes and therefore serve a wider purpose. So if he's prepared to make himself look bad in the process then, for our part, I guess we can put contempt to one side. For the sake of consistency though, the points should still be counted in sour grapes.

Any port in a storm.

2009-12-01T21:27:00.002-03:00

The much anticipated first public meeting has been and gone and already there are worrying signs creeping in that this may not be quite the council of action some people expect. Case in point being the port development: Dick Sawle said he'd like to speed things up, whilst at the same time revealing there would be a new advisory committee. He might as well have said he’d like to build the new port single handed….out of cheese.
Many a good idea has been slowly strangled to death by the treacle-effect brought about from forming a working group, an advisory committee or, dare I say it, a stakeholders’ group (incidentally, if you see Andrea Clausen – ask her how the smoking ban working group got on). We might as well give up now and accept that the inevitable outcome will be that keeping FIPASS going a bit longer will be relatively cheap and that will be that.

Whilst there are people out there with plenty of knowledge of all things maritime and equally good intentions, I can’t help but feel that when some people say that stakeholders are not being fully consulted, they really mean that in the small pond that is the Falklands, they, the big fish, weren’t personally asked for an opinion or their thoughts weren’t treated with the respect they felt they deserved. Get over your self importance and get on with it.

Severely bogged television

2009-11-25T21:15:00.002-03:00

Not wishing to sound like a "Williephile" but old Bill from the West hit the nail on the head at last night's public meeting when talking about the new television system: "back to square one" he was heard to growl. Quite right too, how can installation costs of £255,000 for Camp and £455,000 for Stanley be justifiable, particularly when all we're buying is just BFBS 1 and 2?
BFBS, quite rightly (the clue is in the F, it does not stand for Falklands), do not see the average Benny as an important viewer even if we are paying an astronomical price. So why bother?

All the decent sport is now viewed by the military on Sky Sport 1 and 2, channels which we will not receive under the new service. So we are reduced to paying a sackload of cash for a couple of channels which will give us oft-repeated documentaries, reality TV and soaps. Oh yes, and This Morning!

If only there was a local company offering television services...

All penguined out.

2009-11-23T08:34:00.003-03:00

Graham Bound is quite right to suggest that a new coat-of-arms is long overdue for the Falklands in this week's Penguin News, but one with wildlife? If I see another crest, logo or company name with a penguin or a goose on it, I am going to kick a kitten. It beggars belief that when choosing a company name, so many resort to the predictable postcard images of penguins, seals and the like. One can only imagine what goes through their mind: "Well, the Falklands has a long-standing association with Antarctic explorers and global navigators, we could name our company after one of them to reflect an indefatigable spirit and a willingness to succeed above all” “Ah yes, but King Penguins have the cutest hatchlings ” “That’s settled then, call the registrar general!”
Besides, we’re hardly graced with the kind of graceful majestic wildlife you’d want on a crest down here, are we? An eagle or lion? Definitely. But a waddling bird whose habitat smells like a KFC employee’s crotch and sounds like a donkey being slaughtered? Surely not.

Arguably the albatross is both graceful and majestic, but the problem with albatrosses is that you need to see one up close, or at the very least see it in a photo with a human, to appreciate it in all its glory. Put it on a crest and people are going to start asking why you have a common seagull on there, for that is all an albatross is without perspective: a seagull.

One only has to take a single step into one of Stanley's (overpriced and tacky) souvenir shops to realise that short of slapping a pair of hotpants on them and whoring them out to Taiwanese jiggers, we have exploited penguins and other wildlife as far as we can. As I see it, the only advantage to come from putting a penguin on our crest is that we’ll no longer be mocked as a nation of sheep-shaggers, but penguin-shaggers. And I say advantage as we’d no doubt receive international kudos for overcoming the inherent logistical difficulties of penguin shagging; they are extremely slippery and the wings aren’t half difficult to get a good grip on, nothing like a sheep where the fleece affords no end of sturdy handles… one would imagine.

Of course, this poses the question of what can be put in the crest instead, and as Graham points out, traditionally coats of arms are indicative of industry in a particular region. Again, he rightly goes on to argue that a squid engulfing a tourist is probably not what we’d like to see (not on a coat of arms, anyway), and with the much-maligned sheep out of the picture, we’re left with philately or the civil service; hardly sinew-stiffening stuff. If we were going to have a true reflection of industry in the Islands though, then the moustachioed Mr Monopoly would be a shoe-in, perhaps with Cable and Wireless and Stanley Services logos either side.

So, penguins and industry are out of the running, leaving trusty self-determination. Unfortunately, self-determination is something of an ethereal concept, so putting it on a small crest in a way that makes it immediately obvious would be somewhat challenging; as a general rule, if you wouldn’t expect to see it in a game of Pictionary, it shouldn’t be on a crest

For my money, I think that we should have a monthly or yearly rotating crest, like the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square. People could submit their suggestions anonymously to an internet site for the rest of the population to vote on. One year it could be a guitar with a Johnny Cash Lyric as the motto, another year it could be a teaberry bun, Mike Summers atop a white steed a la Napoleon, an empanada and a bottle of Exportacion, a ball of tumbleweed rolling across West Falkland…

The possibilities are literally endless, and the enormous financial cost of replacing government stationary every year would be by far outweighed by having a truly representative and democratic national emblem.

We’d probably still end up with a fucking penguin though.

Camp carry on.

2009-11-20T11:02:00.002-03:00

Was I the only one surprised to find that two of the three Camp Councillors avoided taking on any camp portfolios, allowing the majority instead to go to a newbie Stanley Councillor? Whilst I am sure the portfolios in question will benefit from Mr Ross's not inconsiderable skills it seems strange that two of the people who apparently believe most strongly in the two constituency system have given an excellent example of why a single constituency would appear to be perfectly acceptable.
The more cynical amongst us may wonder if they have encouraged the new Councillor to take on the poisoned chalice(s) of FIMCO, FLH and Agriculture, allowing them to crow from the sidelines over the many more difficult and unpopular decisions that will have to be made over the coming four years.

It would almost appear as if Camp have only elected one Camp Councillor who is prepared to represent them. It is a shame he is only going to be here for six months of the year but at least Old Mr Bill has taken on camp issues and in fact is a portfolio holder as either deputy or main for all the portfolios, barring transport, which have a major impact on Camp.

	Primary portfolios	Portfolios as deputy
Councilllor Luxton	Civil Aviation FIDC Aquaculture Rural Development	Agriculture FLH/Fox Bay FIMCO Post & Telecommunication Information Technology Monopolies Environment & Heritage Police/Fire/FIDF
Councillor Edwards R	Treasury & Taxation EU Issues SFC (Chair)	Secretariat/Central Administration Civil Aviation Utilities & Municipals Energy & Waste Transport
Councillor Halford	Health & Medical Services Social Services Child Protection Lands Planning & Building	Legislation Registry Treasury & Taxation EU Issues SFC (Chair) Falkland Islands Government Office

It seems that Edwards and Halford are reluctant to put their necks on the line where it truly matters, but are we really surprised?

Speechifying

2009-11-18T14:44:00.005-03:00

I loathe public speaking and rarely practice it, I much prefer to hide behind pen and paper, so perhaps I’m not qualified to pass judgement on others. However, there is many a person doing a job that they aren’t qualified for…

I find it irksome that in Legco, Councillors regularly get up and simply ramble during their adjournment speeches. It’s perhaps insulting to the privileged position that they are in to clearly not prepare for an important moment of their work. If Councillors “just cuff it” in their Legco speeches then how can we expect others in the Islands, in particular the civil service, to take their jobs seriously? I think there is something to the saying that “behaviour breeds behaviour”.

If leading by example isn’t a motivation then perhaps self interest is; Janet Robertson cuffed her way into saying that drugs should only ever be used on an experimental basis by students going overseas and look what happened to her when the electorate got the opportunity to pass judgement.

It is perhaps something deeply tribal but I like a good rousing speech which leaves one motivated, inspired and ready to punch the first person that isn’t “of our tribe”. I therefore listened with hope to the first Legco of the new Council and lamented at the largely uninspiring little talks - they weren’t speeches. With the exception of one, there are clearly no natural speakers among the first timers and if they feel the need to practice in front of the bathroom mirror then I urge them to follow that feeling – better to be laughed at by your next of kin than be vilified by the whole community. Unfortunately nothing much can be said either of those who have been Councillors before. Of particular disappointment was old Bill from the West – in the past I seem to remember he was quite a passionate and motivational speaker. Perhaps invariably it was ripping into someone but for satisfying the tribal need, it did the trick.

The one exception was Dick Sawle who clearly has a lot to live up to and in his first Legco speech, for me, he didn’t disappoint. It was clearly a well prepared speech which is the first fundamental and it was delivered with a certain amount of passion and conviction which is the second fundamental. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the table in front of him was flecked with a little bit of spittle by the time he had finished. I recall little of what he actually said but I do remember getting a bit of the inspirational feeling which I expect from Councillors’ speeches. I wasn’t quite ready to assault the Casa Rosada single handed but I might perhaps have given Aarron Richardson a firm glare if I had seen him in the street.

Unfortunately the flames were then snuffed out by Shorty who finished his little talk by making observations about an ash tray on the table in front of him, for crying out loud. But lest he start penning his resignation letter, I would say not all is lost because he did make an attempt at humour and that can be an alternative to tribalism, but it too needs a lot of skill in preparation and delivery; it’s not an easy cuff.

Having set forth on simply making a few observations about Councillors speeches, I’ve arrived at making a hypothesis about what the real purpose of Councillors is. The usual line to trot out is that they are there to lead the country by making good decisions for the interests of the Islands etc etc.; a sort of boring bureaucratic answer that a career civil servant would give. Whilst it might be correct in a technical sense, it overlooks what I suggest is a more fundamental role: Councillors are really there to motivate and inspire us, for in that state we’ll achieve far more as a nation than if we simply rely on making good administrative decisions. In short they are there to feed our need for tribalism for without that we’ll weaken and fall – as individuals and as a nation. If this is branded as “manipulation” by the lefty pinkos then so be it, if my pre-historic need is satisfied then what do I care? If in my manipulated state I’m driven to achieve something then so be it.

Councillors might take this on board and then the adjournment speeches might actually serve a purpose rather than being a procedural irrelevancy. Imagine how much interesting Legco would become if a Councillor actually dared to walk around the chamber during his turn to speak. Granted a few of the stuffy old aristocracy would probably pass away in horror but everything has a cost. If Shorty actually picked up that ash tray and smashed it onto the table to lend gravitas to a point, that would be new. If Bill rediscovered his passion and slumped into his chair in a state of exhaustion with froth at the corners of his mouth after giving it his all in trying to pass a motion then we wouldn’t mind. If Jan tugged on a pair of jack boots, strode down the chamber table and kicked the Chief Executive unconscious, would we not, with our tribalism nourished, rise to greater things?