30.viii.2011 - 30.viii.2013

Oh frabjous day,
Calloo callay!


Until the next time

The Baroness Thatcher R.I.P.

There will be many thousands of words written and spoken following the announcement today of the death of Lady Thatcher and there is not much for me to do in this regard but to express in a few words, my view.

She was certainly the greatest peace-time British prime minister of the 20th century (though not the most stylish - an accolade I bizarrely award to Sir Arthur (later Earl)  Balfour) having restored to Britain a degree of self-esteem following the appalling 1970s.

I of course am old enough to recall the union-induced miseries of that time: the three-day week, the uncollected rubbish in the streets, the farce at British Leyland  with "Red Robbo" and his appalling chums, the green "black" bags, the "nuclear-free zones", the unburied dead, the innumerable absurd strikes, loss-making nationalised industries, the government of the time cap-in-hand to the IMF and on and on.  And later, Derek Hatton and his corrupt friends in Liverpool, the militant Tendency.  Then there was that clown Livingstone in London, with "Babies against the Bomb" (£50,000) and his Lesbian Workshops, his handshakes with the disgusting IRA terrorists, and all the rest of the ratepayer-funded ideological rubbish that he was able to invent.

Mrs Thatcher as she then was, put an end to that nonsense.  There was damage done undoubtedly, but heartless as it may sound, it is my view that the longer one delays treatment for a disease, the more powerful must be the medicine; I have reservations about some of the "treatment" meted out...

Regular readers will know that until relatively recently I lived in France for a number of years.  France is a deeply conservative country, heavily unionised and also has long-established monopolies - the taxis in Paris, the Tabacs, the pharmacies.  There is also the national characteristic of burning motor-cars for the slimmest of possible reasons.  Any time a large company there wishes to reduce its workforce in the face of falling sales etc., there is nearly always an enormous strike, threats to the directors etc.  All in all reminiscent of Britain in the 1970s.  M. Sarkozy was supposed to change all that, but he was no Thatcher I'm afraid; I foresee a grim future for La Belle France.

Meanwhile, when Volkswagen was "up against it" a few years ago, the company approached the union telling them that in future for the good of the company, each worker must do four hours more - unpaid - per week.  The union, I.G. Metall agreed; Germany (suffering much opprobrium from certain spendthrift southern European countries) goes from strength to strength.

It is extraordinary that certain political types seem unable to grasp the simple lesson.

Lady Thatcher did; we should be grateful.

Until the next time.

Horse-Shit?

There's a big fuss at present about horse-meat.

Rightly so if it has been sold as beef, mutton, pork &c. by bent meat processors and suppliers, and there is a slim chance that some of the horses that provided the meat may have been treated with a drug that is apt to disagree with humans.

Actually, I suspect that the English are more upset about the fact that it is horse - I have no reason for thinking this but I suspect that it is the case, and it is an ideal subject for the tabloid press to "get their teeth into"!

Nothing wrong with horse-meat; in France I ate it raw (Cheval Tartare) and very good it was too.

Until the next time

Mali

As has been widely reported, the French have responded to the request for help from the Malian government in regard to the insurgency of Al Quaeda terrorists in Mali.

The situation is the subject of a United Nations resolution, and in consequence of this, the French are receiving assistance with logistics from the UK, the USA, Canada, Belgium, Denmark and Italy.  Additionally, troops from a number of Mali's neighbours, numbering in the region of 5000 are to help in repelling the terrorist insurgents.

I note that as usual, no help is apparently coming from those other permanent members of the UN Security Council, Russia and China.  I wonder why?  Surely they do not support these incursions?  Certainly the Russians and Chinese are fairly robust when Islamic extremism appears in their bailiwicks... Are they afraid of upsetting some of their African client states I wonder.

Until the next time.

Quel Choc! (Part Deux)

A new report today from the BBC states that M. Depardieu is to give up his French passport, following his move over the border to Belgium.

The star of Asterix & Obelix is very upset by comments from M. Jean-Marc Ayrault, the prime minister.

From the BBC report:

The prime minister had suggested that Depardieu's move to the town of Nechin, just over the border from the French city of Lille, was unpatriotic at a time of cutbacks.

"I find this quite shabby. All that just to avoid paying tax," he said on France 2 TV channel. "Paying a tax is an act of solidarity, a patriotic act."

M. Depardieu says that so far in his career, he has paid €145,000,000 in taxes.

Given that vast sum, I am inclined to sympathise with him!

Until the next time.

Quel Choc! (Pour les francais et des francophones)

No shock really: actor Gerard Depardieu is selling the hotel in Paris that he bought in 1994 for 25 million francs (£2.5 millions) - he's asking €50 million (£40,600,000) for what is a delightful property.  See the Le Monde article for a description and pictures.

Given that there is now, in the person of M. Francois Hollande a socialist president who has already raised the maximum rate of income tax to 75% and also increased the scandalous wealth taxes that have burdened the French for so long, it is hardly surprising that M. Depardieu has decided to become a tax exile: he has moved to Belgium.

Apparently M. Depardieu seeks the calme of his new place of residence; whilst this may be true, I fear that it is just window-dressing, as the French are very sensitive about rich Frenchmen 'deserting' La patrie.  I well remember the fuss when Johnny Halliday cleared out - to Gstaad in Switzerland - obviously for tax reasons.

The fact is that for years taxes have been very high in France; given the country's stagnant economy, large public debt and increasing unemployment, together with its enormous bureaucracy and expensive social model, I believe that a different approach is required - but of course the trades unions there will never wear it.  Perhaps nemesis beckons?

A la prochaine

A Curious Coincidence?

In the past two days, two very prominent Americans have resigned from their positions.  These are General David Petraeus, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Mr Christopher Kubasik, President and Chief Executive Officer designate at Lockheed Corporation.

Both men have resigned on account of extra-marital affairs, General Petraeus describing his behaviour as "unacceptable for the leader of the nation's main intelligence agency."  Mr Kubasik's resignation follows an investigation by an "ethics committee;"  the present CEO a Mr Robert Stevens commented that Mr Kubasik's relationship was "inconsistent with our values and standards."

This coincidence prompts several reflections in this writer.

First it reinforces my suspicion of a growing puritanism which I have suspected for many years: it is now routine for British MPs to resign under similar circumstances (I have never understood why this should be so). I do not see that an MP's (or for that matter any official's) private life need in any way affect his ability or indeed, inability to carry out his responsibilities. The only exception to this last point I would consider would be where an individual might be exposed to risk of blackmail which could endanger national security.

Second, I do not think that the CIA nor Lockheed should perhaps be the first in line to be adopting a high moral tone; of course optimists will say that there is always room for improvement, but both organizations have (inevitably perhaps given their fields of operation) what at the very least might be called murky histories and I do not think that senior officials' private lives are the first place to endeavour to effect an amelioration.

Third, it is well known that the French handle this sort of thing much better, having generally a greater respect for the private lives of their officials; perhaps the Americans should have reflected a little before referring to "Freedom Fries" and "Cheese-eating surrender monkeys" and making silly jokes about the very competent French armed forces. I must add that I doubt that such words came from the mouths of the Director of the CIA or the CEO at Lockheed.

Fourth, both resignations have come immediately after the re-election of President Obama; a cleaning of the Augean Stables perhaps? How would such matters have been treated under a Romney presidency?

I read in the BBC article linked above that General Petraeus's affair was with his biographer, Miss Paula Bradwell.  Miss Bradwell recently produced a piece for Newsweek called "General David Petraeus's Rules for Living".  It is important to read the piece; they are very good rules, though it would take a better man than I to follow them to the letter; I do not think that the General has infringed them. 

UPDATE: I see that senior BBC reporter, John Simpson has published an encomium of the general.  Despite lacking comprehensive knowledge of the subject, I am inclined to agree. I note that Simpson touches on the subject of blackmail risk to which I referred above.  I'd be willing to wager that in such circumstances, the General would be more likely to follow the example of the Duke of Wellington and say "Publish and be damned."

Until the next time

Them & Us?

The news reported today - in this case by the BBC - about French President Sarkozy's Presidential Aircraft had me spluttering over my coffee this morning.

With breathtaking arrogance, the aircraft's specification includes an "air-conditioned" smoking room. I should state here and now, that I am entirely in favour of air-conditioned smoking rooms being installed everywhere, but it seems unlikely to happen in France, where just as in the fascistically oppressive UK, smoking is banned in all public places (since January 2nd 2008) and in the workplace (since 2007).

Since the presidential aeroplane has cost the French taxpayer about €180 million, one is entitled to believe that the aircraft constitutes - at least part of the time (as does the Elysée Palace for that matter where the President is known to enjoy his cigars) a "workplace."

Personally I hope the President enjoys his cigars; it's just that I don't understand why he is the only citizen of France who is permitted to smoke at work, the rest of us having to put up with cold/rain/snow/ice/wind for our rather long winters here, for which, no doubt, that arrant bullshit "global warming" is to blame.

In "Tobacco News" meanwhile I have found a splendid article about the arrogance of our rulers here concerning a State Secretary (= Junior Minister) one M. Christian Blanc, who was caught having spent €12,000 of public money on fine Cuban cigars. Generously the article adds, he sent a cheque for €3500 "for the two boxes of 25 he smokes each month" whilst being unable to account for the remaining €8500-worth.

Even more intriguing, is the reference to the practice which ended in 2001:

In Scandinavia, Germany, or even in Britain these days, Blanc would now be looking for a new job. The opposition is spluttering, but he will no doubt just be rapped on the knuckles by François Fillon, the Prime Minister, and left in peace. Until recently, no-one bothered much about the huge sums that are spent on the comfort of the state nobility. Only in 2001, did President Chirac end the practice under which all ministers were given a monthly suitcase of cash, known as ‘special funds’, to spend on whatever they liked.

This merits further investigation I think.

Until the next time.

A bit more on the "Lemmings"

A scene from today's France
Source

From today's DailyTelegraph website:

"The barricades are up, acrid tear gas is filling the streets, angry hordes of striking workers and students are preparing to do battle against a common enemy. Eh oui, the French are at it again. In the past, I have found the Gallic shrug the best response to the country’s trigger-happy strike culture – it’s just something you have to learn to live with. This time, though, I’m finding it difficult to shrug off – and I am not alone. "

The article finishes with the following paragraph:

"But it will be like facing an incoming tide. As Le Monde pointed out yesterday, France is a very conservative country “hell-bent on keeping the status quo and acquired (social) rights, with history used as a windshield against reality”. Even the Iron Lady might have resorted to a Gallic shrug at the thought of trying to break the Frenchman’s bond with his placard. "

Since his election in 2007, President Sarkozy has attempted, at least from time to time, to introduce a few reforms. There was the idea for example, to allow minicabs to operate; this resulted in total chaos in Paris as the taxi drivers mounted a very large protest. And there ere the 2006 student protests referred to in the Telegraph article.

It is important to understand how different certain things are in France. You cannot buy cigarettes or aspirin in a supermarket, why? Because the Tabacs and the Pharmacies are cartels; the taxi-drivers are obviously another example, even if their cartel is an unofficial one. Such privileges are jealously guarded by the (very conservative) French.

(Those of us who are fortunate enough to live close to the Swiss border are able to circumlocute some of these inconveniences - and often save money too. Near where I live, there is a bar right on the border. There one can buy half a litre of beer for four Swiss francs - about €3.10 whilst less than 100 metres away in France one pays €2.50 for a quarter of a litre. The best thing is that when drinking my near-pint of Feldschlossen on the border, I can sit in the bar and SMOKE - hurrah!)

Any suggestion that M. Sarkozy can follow in the steps of Mrs Thatcher would seem to be doomed to failure: in 1984, Mrs Thatcher had to deal with a very determined National Union of Mineworkers; Sarkozy has to face, it seems millions of angry - and misguided - people ranging from schoolchildren to pensioners.

Perhaps France itself is doomed?

Until the next time.

Google News

The first "news" is that the rash of post on this blog is the outcome of a log-jam caused by recurrent problems with Google's "Blogger" which of course hosts this blog and millions of others.

Meanwhile, the French, who have great difficulty in digesting the fact that the Internet, although invented by an Englishman (Tim Berners-Lea) is largely dominated by the USA. The latest crackpot idea from France is a "Google Tax". The report in the Daily Telegraph includes the following:

"Besides Google, the tax would target other large [non-French!]operators in Europe such as Microsoft and Yahoo! whether or not their offices are in France. Google's European headquarters are in Ireland, but under the proposal, the operator would pay a levy every time a French internet user clicks on an advertising banner or sponsored link on its sites."

The article adds:

"Guillaume Cerutti, one of the authors of the report said the tax would put an end to "enrichment without any limit or compensation"."

One always thinks of the old saying "Not invented here" when reading about such French initiatives.

Google is so vast, powerful and influential, that inevitably certain people are apt to spot some sort of global conspiracy. As a result the concept of the "Google Toilet has been born:



Well, a little exaggeration is always good for a smile isn't it?


Finally, following a massive cyber attack which apparently originated in China, Google after demonstrating for over three years great patience with the very proscriptive Chinese Republic, has announced that it will no longer censor its output. This of course means that its presence in China will shortly come to an end - at least on the face of it although I read somewhere today of a very low-key response from China. Perhaps, just perhaps, Google is big enough to influence even the vast Republic of China itself?

We shall of course see.

Until the next time