In Deep Guano

Posted on June 14, 2012 by davidsberry

After years of biting my tongue, I have put myself on our major local charity’s ‘shit list’. This week, East Lothian Council’s new Cabinet approved a paper several years in the making, setting up an arm’s-length North Berwick Harbour Trust to manage most of the non-private facilities within the harbour area. This concept has been some time in the making, building, as it does, on the success achieved in Dunbar, created by the Dunbar Harbour Trust Transfer Order of 2004.

Matters in North Berwick had been more complicated by the number of maintenance issues concerning the harbour itself and the presence of the popular and successful Scottish Seabird Centre within the proposed harbour area. Nonetheless, work undertaken by local volunteers in a provisional Harbour Trust Association had not only brought a degree of focus and management that ELC had been unable to achieve itself but most of the ‘snagging issue’ had been resolved by an immense amount of co-operative work between the HTA and ELC’s Communities department.

Ownership of the area is complex, with a couple of dozen private dwellings being excluded from the proposed Trust control and the local laird having extensive holdings around the old kirk that were leased to and being managed by the SSC. The SSC itself has a 99-year lease with both the Laird and the Council.

Until a year ago, the intention of all involved had been for all ELC assets to transfer to the Trust, including those lands over which the SSC holds its 99-year lease. For the last year, the SSC has waged a resolute campaign to prevent those lands being transferred to the Trust. Their explanation that they would rather have ELC than the Trust as a landlord has gone down very badly with the HTA volunteers and this week’s decision to ignore their protests has caused bad feeling among those who are to form the Trust.

Having been a supporter of the SSC from as far back as local twitcher Bill Gardner’s original idea in the mid-nineties (and, as member No 16, an early activist), I expressed major reservations about the decision to accommodate the SSC and what its repercussions might be. The SSC has certainly helped put North Berwick firmly back on the map as a major Scottish tourist destination.

But, that said, the competitive manner it which it is being managed is causing increasing alarm. From charging local groups like NB Cinema Club full whack for use of SSC facilities, through extending their retail space to compete directly with local businesses and forever increased emphasis on income, as opposed to the original primary thrust of education, it has become increasingly autocratic and insensitive to a community that supported its inception so strongly.

While there was bound to be some competition, the manner in which the SSC took funding to run a ferry to Fife and to purchase a RIB, which then ran in competition with local Bass boat trips after a handful of ferry trips, then growing the fleet to four boats by buying out a local operator, has caused much ill-feeling among other harbour users.

At the same time, the provision of a car park, undertaken originally by ELC, was extended three years ago to cope with demand. But the SSC has raised local ire by issuing penalties local residents who dared use it and now have brought in an external organisation to police parking charges. As any such civil penalty cannot legally do more than recover costs, this cannot represent other than a loss-making operation for the SSC.

Poor relations with other local parties came to a head with the forming of a Harbour Trust. For the last year, the SSC has refused to countenance the ownership of the land on which it sits passing to any Trust. The aggressive manner in which this was argued was never, in my view, given any valid basis. At the same time, they declined to share with the all-volunteer Trust Association plans that they have for expanding into a marine centre. This meant long-term arrangements, such as whether space for a Spiegeltent on the Esplanade as part of future Fringe by the Sea events could continue, came into question.

So, this week was the parting of our ways. I sounded off loudly in the Cabinet debate and my name is now guano among the SSC’s illustrious board members. But I just can’t rationalise how can you make a forward-looking partnership of a Trust successful if a major player therein expresses no trust in its supposed partners. With their lease secure for 99 years, what adverse change could be forced on them? What on earth was their motivation—other than gratifying their own paranoia?

Having failed in my efforts to relevant persuade ELC officials all the way to the Chief Executive and Council Leader of the foolishness of launching any Trust where a major partner exhibits megalomanic selfishness, I had to protest that ELC would better serve the community at large by holding off on the Trust until the SSC learns what the word ‘trust’ actually means.

Your Humble Scribe (sans Guano) in Crusty Mariner Gear as SSC Volunteer Guide in 2010

Posted in Commerce, Community | Tagged | Leave a comment

CoSLA Gets Grumpy

Posted on June 13, 2012 by davidsberry

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is, even by its own admission, something of an anorak organisation. Tucked away in the monolithic glass-and-concrete office blocks trapped between the endless tram works on Haymarket Terrace and the endless trains streaming through Haymarket station, its couple of dozen staff spend their time trying to speak for the 32 councils that cover Scotland.

Once almost entirely a Labour fiefdom, that all changed in 2007 when all but three councils swung out of Labour’s overall control and the SNP became a comparable force in CoSLA by sending, for the first time, a comparable number of delegates. We’ll leave CoSLA’s organisation and effectiveness in its role to another blog.

The key issue is that, pre-2007, despite Labour dominating both it and the Scottish Executive (as the Scottish Government was then styled) they went at each other in best stairheid rammy tradition. SInce 2007, the Concordat, the lifting of restrictions like funding ring-fencing, new and enlightened leadership from President Pat Watters and realpolitik breaking out among the more balanced delegate coherts, all led to five years of constructive dialogue and real progress in government/council relations.

The first shift came in 2011 when the SNP suddenly dominated the Scottish Parliament with 69 MSPs—the first majority enjoyed there—and the mood music changed, Cabinet Secretary John Swinney, whose brief includes local government, did not change but the SNP’s tail had gone up and more ambitious, if not abrasive, statements started to emerge. At the same time, the Local Government brief was handed to Aileen Campbell—young, bright but split new into the job of MSP, let alone in wrestling with council neanderthals from darkest Lanarkshire.

That lasted a short time before Derek Mackay, also part of the young & bright MSP intake but with four years of leading Renfrewshire Council and the SNP delegation to CoSLA, a more experienced hand. Trouble was, Derek was so highly thought of, he was also given the SNP Business Convener gig, formerly handled by party heavyweight fixers Bruce Crawford MSP and Angus Robertson MP.

But, nonetheless, the CoSLA—SG relationship continued to work in a far more constructive manner than it had pre-2007. Key issues like pay negotiation or council tax freeze were tabled, discussed and agreed; various policy initiatives affecting councils like alcohol minimum pricing or police/fire reform were aired and, if not concluded, were seen as useful exchanges of position.

But roll forward to last month, when the council elections saw a significant number of council administrations alter on the backs of the results, and we may yet see the most significant outcome of those elections be the CoSLA delegate allocations made by the new administrations.

Delegate numbers are proportionate to the size of council (generally 3 to 6) and CoSLA policy (unenforceable) is that they should reflect the political composition of the council. So, whereas my own East Lothian had once sent 3 Labour delegates pre-2007, we sent one each Labour, SNP and Lib-Dem for the 2007-12 sessions. Both Lanarkshires had kept their pre-2007 thinking and had each sent 6 Labour delegates.

This meant, despite winning more council seats than Labour, SNP delegates to CoSLA were outnumbered. What kept CoSLA balanced, however, were healthy delegations of (in order of size) Independent. Lib-Dem and Tory councillors. CoSLA roughly reflected the average council where SNP & Labour held the biggest groups but neither dominated alone. But the demise of the Lib-Dems has changed much in council control and the net makeup of CoSLA will not become clear until its first full meeting on June 29th.

In North Lanarkshire, Council leader Jim McCabe, a long-time CoSLA delegate and believer in the justification for Labour dominance, told the Wishaw Press: “The job we have here is to make sure the council is best represented on any forum.” As a result, all six of its delegates are again Labour.

In Falkirk, the politically awkward set-up of Labour/Tory administration will take three of the four positions and their is every indication that major councils like Aberdeen and Stirling with the same type of administration will follow suit. The latter is likely to be especially one-sided as Leader Corrie McChord has ambitions to replace Pat Watters as President and will want to secure as many delegates as he can to beat the SNP’s Rob Murray, a veteran CoSLA vice-president and Leader of the newly revived SNP in Angus.

Since Labour controls only four councils outright, with four minorities, while the SNP controls two with three minorities, it might seem a close run thing. But, on top of four LAB/CON councils, others are making unionist noises about keeping the SNP down in local government to help balance their uppitiness in the Parliament. Of the other coalitions, six exclude the SNP entirely, while another six have some form of SNP presence in the Administration.

Given the co-ordinated aggression with which the SNP was systematically excluded from power where that was feasible, the chances of delegates being assigned on the same principles seem low. The 11 where the SNP have a say are likely to follow the practice from 2007 of allocating delegates proportionally. But if the 18 others (3 are wholly independent-run) follow Jim McCabe’s partisan lead, the years of partnership between CoSLA and the government is about to be replaced by partisanship.

As the relevant minister, Derek Mackay has already registered his concern that a more hostile, not to say obstructive, era may be about to dawn. Holyrood quoted him saying:

“I have to express some concern at early indications that some local authorities are appointing delegate entitlement entirely for the administration. That doesn’t seem to respect the COSLA guidance on proportionality and fairness in representing the political composition of the local authority.”

With their eight official spokespersons and working groups, backed up by CoSLA staff, the opportunity for guerilla actions and PR bouts with the Scottish Government is huge. Issues such as pensions, pay freeze, budget limits, shared services, ballooning services for the elderly, etc are all hot topics already and allies in unions or segments of the public to make them hot-spots would not be hard to find.

But the whole edifice of Concordat, Single Outcome Agreements, council tax freeze and joint working across public agencies, so carefully constructed over the last five years, could be in jeopardy. Perhaps leaders like McCabe are not prepared for the equivalent of local government civil war because their own budgets could get even worse than they are. But with the independence debate representing as serious a decision as any generation has confronted, why wouldn’t a dedicated unionist use every weapon to hand to derail it?

Posted in Politics | Tagged | Leave a comment

A Gorgon for Me; A Gorgon for Me

Posted on June 10, 2012 by davidsberry

Ed Milliband’s speech on “Defending the Union” given at the South Bank’s Royal Festival Hall on June 7th was, in many ways, long overdue. Despite Tory protestations at being the prime defenders of the United Kingdom (although the ‘Unionist’ part of their title is actually a century-old reference to Ireland), their political decline in Scotland clearly makes Labour the leading party in any real defence of the status quo.

The speech was competent, well delivered and, most importantly, long overdue. Almost certainly, unionists of all political stripes would have felt relief, if not encouragement, that the UK’s main opposition leader had nailed his Union flag firmly to the mast. Indeed, in it was much that thoughtful supporters of independence could warm to: the idea that being English/Scottish and British was no contradiction; that peoples of this island shared much common culture, pride and history; that how we work together here will determine all our future prosperity and happiness.

It was widely reported, as it should have been, as a major statement on the subject. The Hootsmon chose, in its usual corrosive style, to lead on Ed’s argument that England ought to have a say in any independence deliberation for Scotland and that his own party has been guilty of burying English identity for fear of retreating into a “narrow nationalism: for too long people have believed that to express English identity is to undermine the Union.” Fair enough, but then he claimed that this year’s jubilee and Olympics had heightened awareness of “multiple identities”.

And this seems to be where Ed (and many of his well intentioned colleagues) get themselves into difficulties, conflating geography with identity, past history with future ambitions and culture with politics. People are complex—their cultures are bewilderingly so. Yeats—no stranger to the complex path to independence—said “Out of the argument with ourselves, we make poetry; out of the argument with others, we make politics”. And, just as friendship or even marriage is a series of adjustments to the ideal, our imperfect political arrangements constantly balance ideals with pragmatism. A man who knew something about putting a Union together was Bismarck, whose “Politics is the art of the possible” has been a much-used quote since.

No-one argues that Britain has not been a success as a country. For most of three centuries it was the world’s leading power. In contributions to science, technology, trade, culture, industry, arts, society, freedom, etc, etc it need bow to no-one. Its four peoples bonded together to catalyse many other greater and lesser countries, all of whom (with the glaring exception of Zimbabwe) are beacons of progress across the globe. Our joint history, especially when couched in resonant Churchillian prose, makes a rattling good read.

But, equally, no-one now thinks of Eire as anything but a normal country AND, at the same time, a full partner in the English-speaking world, in the EU and even in the British Isles. Relations with the UK are superb; if there are any wrinkles they are found in that part of Ireland that Imperial Britain could not thole losing in 1922. Just as the Irish once wrestled with their own identity and own political existence, so the Scots and the Welsh are making excellent progress in this and—thankfully—in a more peaceable way.

All of which leads to the discussion of England and its own identity and political existence. Here, Ed’s speech was much less surefooted. Without examining the case, he dismissed the need for an English parliament or even a discussion of what it means to be English, as opposed to British. This seems a major mistake. Labour Uncut has written a pretty shrewd analysis of the speech, in which it compares Ed to Perseus who, while talking cogently about the problem, evades entering the Gorgon’s cave to slay the Medusa of Englishness.

The analysis focusses on Milliband’s conflation of culture with politics:

“English cultural expression is “not about an English Parliament or an English Assembly.” So wave the flag of St.George like Bobby Moore was still captain of England but don’t get all political about it? We’ll have none of that.”

England does need a thorough awakening from the complacency with which it patched its own institutions 300 years ago to make the UK, rather than seeing any need for new ones. The jubilee rather highlighted this where not just Auntie Beeb kept using the word British when it meant English because it is all too easy not to bother with the distinction. In 1707, Scotland received representation in the English parliament with a handful of MPs and 16 peers. The Church of England continued unaltered with the British monarch as its head. The Bank of England continued as the reserve bank of the British state. Nelson’s famous message at Trafalgar started “England expects…”

It is not that the Scots should be touchy about all this—indeed, I think we have tholed three centuries of English jingoism with a fair bit of good humour. But the time has come to look England straight in the eye and ask what it wants to be when it grows up. That Scotland was already heading its own way was obvious in the 1987 General Election which Robin Day regarded as a non-event because the Thatcher majority shifted marginally from 140 to 100. And yet, Scotland voted massively against the Tories, who lost 11 of their seats there to have 10 in 71.

Ed sees no need for an English Parliament because the 1990’s Labour initiative for regional assemblies got short shrift. That was because England is a pretty monolithic state—and always has been. Compared to Germany its regional politics are barely discernable beyond a habitual North/South divide based largely on industrial cities and rural idylls. Labour is now banking on that lack of concern locking in the status quo. But the constitution is lop-sided and unstable. It will actually take a force of will for it not to topple. It may not be in 2014 but it is by no means unimaginable that a strong argument for a political expression of Englishness will succeed beyond then.

The Scots have done this. Our Medusa Gorgon is toast. In the last decade and as compared to the turbulent 1980’s, confusion about what it is to be Scots and how their political ambitions are to be realised has abated. What will happen in 2014 may still be an open question but most are up for asking it—even as they disagree on the answer—just because it will clear the decks and move a country the great majority identify with further down the road to its future; the fishermen of Fraserburgh and the Pakistani-Scots of Polloksheilds all accept this.

But it’s a road England has yet to set off down. Feeling cosy after the jubilee warmth may not be the time to bring this up but, if not Ed, someone has to not just pose the question of Englishness but to boldly enter the cave where it lives and drag its severed head out into the light of day for all to see what exactly this was all about.

Image

Posted in Politics | Tagged , | 1 Comment

EIS empty vessels making a lot of noise

Posted on June 9, 2012 by davidsberry

EIS empty vessels making a lot of noise.

Posted in Education | Leave a comment

Emancipating the Ladies from Hell

Posted on June 8, 2012 by davidsberry

At last the forces of unionism are drawing together something approaching a campaign to save their union. The latest co-ordinated assault in the pages of the Hootsmon involved offsetting Swinney’s announcement of a new tax regime in Scotland by a two-page spread by Ed Milliband claiming we could not be both independent and British and a rather spurious piece from Defence Secretary Philip Hammond that any Scottish Army would be ‘unsustainable’. This was complemented by an op ed piece where a Tom Miers, citing his long family tradition of military service claimed independence would be the ‘death of military tradition‘ in Scottish units.

However orchestrated all these pieces critical of independence and its corrosive influence on the prospects of any purely Scottish military might be, it was certainly not substantiated by much in the way of argument and evidence. In fact, while excoriating the prospect for it in Scotland, Miers was sympathetic, if not openly supportive of Hammond’s plans to further reduce British military numbers from 108,000 to barely 82,000—and with them to face the merger or dissolution of more regiments.

What is evident is current UK military overstretch, despite an MoD budget of £40bn—the third largest in the world. This does represent an unsustainable disaster and is substantiated—by recent £4bn scrapping of Nimrod replacements; by bargain-basement sell-off of 72 Harriers to the USMC; by repeated shortfall of equipment for our forces overseas, especially in Afghanistan. And yet Hammond, not content with ‘rationalising’ 17 once-proud Scottish regiments into a single RRS, is hell-bent on discharging another 20,000 professionals?

This is sheer nonsense.

But consider this. A proportionate (8.5% by population) defence budget for Scotland of £3.4bn would be freed of many ludicrous UK distortions and drains on budget: Trident, nuclear bases, aircraft carriers, main battle tanks and similar kit is not only expensive but vulnerable and clumsy. How could a more balanced useful and deployable active army be created from existing units of the British Army? Rather easily.

Let’s assume that The Scots Guards stay with the British Army as a memento of our long military history together.  The five active battalions of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, restored to five component regiments would provide a core for any Scottish Army:

  • Royal Highland Fusiliers (Light Infantry)
  • Argylls & Sutherland Highlanders (Air Assault)
  • Black Watch (Light Infantry)
  • Highlanders (Mechanised with 45 x Warrior & 25 Boxer armoured vehicles)
  • Scottish Borderers (Light Infantry)

These provide an active brigade, say 51st Light Infantry, plus two battalions for a 52nd Mobile Brigade that would be augmented by existing active Scottish formations

  • Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, reconstituted as a reconnaissance regiment (15 x Warrior; 25 x Scimitar; 25 Boxer) and the third battalion of 52nd Mobile Brigade
  • 42 Commando, retrained for deployment as special forces small units focussed on defence of North Sea rigs but capable of air assault along the the Argylls
  • 40th Artillery Regiment, organised to deploy composite battalions (105mm/Javelin/Rapier) in support of 51st & 52nd brigades
  • 38th Engineer Regiment, organised to deploy composite battalions (pioneer/assault/REME) in support of 51st & 52nd brigades
  • 32nd Signal Regiment, organised to deploy in support of 51st & 52nd brigades

A proportion of logistics, medical, adjutant and training would also be expected, as would existing bases such as Glencorse, Redford and Fort George. The remaining two territorial battalions of the present RRS would provide the core for six reserve regiments that would constitute the 9th and 15th brigades in the event of mobilisation of the forces. These could revive the identities of formerly amalgamated Scottish regiments and, like them, be based and recruited geographically, for example:

  • Gordon Highlanders (Light Infantry—based in the North East)
  • Seaforth Highlanders (Light Infantry—based in the Highlands)
  • Cameron Highlanders (Light Infantry—based in Tayside/Stirling)
  • Highland Light Infantry (Light Infantry—based in Glasgow)
  • Scottish Yeomanry (Mechanised—based in Edinburgh)
  • Scots Greys (Mechanised—based in Southern Scotland)

And though they might restore the 339 battle honours to their colours, such a force is clearly no match for a major enemy. But why should it be? Scotland’s fortunate position means that it has no obvious enemy if relations with England remain as cordial as they are today. And though, light as this force is, it is comparable to the 35,000 the Danes can field and far more flexible and useful than the armour-heavy deployment of the present British Army. Clearly, close working with the British Army would be both desirable and sensible, along with adopting NATO standards in equipment and training.

But most ludicrous of any assertion in the Hootsmon is the idea that such forces would “languish in barracks”. Such assumption ignores the cocky pugilistic nature still alive and well in the young men of Scotland. Of all the world’s infantry, the “Ladies from Hell” boast 300-years of  global history and have no need for proof of their worth. There would be not just active training with their neighbours and allies but deployment on operations around the globe in NATO or UN actions. Keeping them home would be a bad idea.

While home, they would have a far more prominent ceremonial role in Scotland’s barracks and castles (c.f. Brigade of Guards in London) but Scottish soldiers’ reputation would keep them in high demand in the world’s hotspots. So, while a concern that they might languish is understandable and a professional soldier currently serving in the British Army might regard a ’smaller’ army with scepticism at first, the Scots will not lack for foreign adventures.

The difference is that they are more likely to be popular ones. Light infantry are tough, resilient soldiers. They make good, heavy-duty, on-the-street police for the Lebanons and Liberias of the world. They also won’t balk at helping pull survivors from earthquake rubble whether in Haiti or Japan. From Cassino to Korea, Scottish soldiers have made friends in the past and that gruff, no-nonsense good sense of the Jocks will make more friends in the future because they put on no airs and know how to handle themselves.

When the serving Scot discovers that pay will be better and his equipment more modern, that unit morale is sky-high and deployments interesting, that they are sent as friends and not as a hostile occupiers of the Iraqs and Afghanistans, then there will be fewer  recruitment problems than those with which the RRS, despite fine Samoan volunteers, is being bedevilled at present.

Indeed, we may have to consider weeding the English applicants out.

Posted in Community, Politics | Tagged | Leave a comment

But Don’t Mention the War

Posted on June 7, 2012 by davidsberry

It seems that last weekend’s jubilee was a big hit across Germany. Several channels carried coverage and there appears to be a certain fascination with things ‘Englische’. Some touchy Scots find the endemic continental verbal sloppiness between ‘British’ and ‘English’ insufferable but it is a fact of life; get over it. The main thing is that we Scots appear to be riding a minor wave of popularity, along with our English cousins.

Coverage of UK national events has been underpinned by a ZDF (‘Second German TV’) channel focus on Scotland. They recently broadcast nothing short of a sales travelogue and followed Angus Robertson MP (chatting in his fluent German) around photogenic corners his Moray constituency from teenagers in lofty Tomintoul to craggy Macduff fishermen. The theme was independence and how current it has become as a topic. Certainly this year has seen a notable increase in German tourists coming to Edinburgh and down the Lothian coast.

All this was documented in David Leask’s piece in yesterday’s Herald. But there’s more than just whisky-tinted tourism or curiosity going on. Yesterday also saw the last David Hume lecture at Edinburgh’s Royal Society, given by the Prime Minister of Lower Saxony, in Scotland at the invitation of the German Consul, the indefatigable Wolfgang Moosberger, for three days of talks with Scottish business and our First Minister.

As might be expected from his name, David MacAllister was fluent in English, delivering a complex speech on current affairs in Europe with panache and humour of which even native speakers would have been justly proud. His grasp of things Scottish was explicable because his father, entering Germany in 1945 as a member of the 51st Highland Division, married and settled there and finally became, he said, fully European  one day in 1981 when he saw his son dressed ready for national service in German Army uniform.

Making many references to historic connections with Scotland, such as Walter Scott’s interest in the tales of the brothers Grimm, Prime Minister MacAllister knew his history, relating how Hanover had shared a monarch with Britain until 1837 when the prospect of a Queen had been more than the Germans could stomach. He was clearly aware of the chequered relations between the countries. He expressed particular gratitude that Keynes had warned against the reparations insisted on in 1919 and how the British had been insistent on giving Germans the chance to re-educate themselves and set up a fully functioning democratic republic within a few years of the collapse of the Nazi regime.

But, while appreciating and learning lessons from the past, he clearly saw the future as another country, chiding us with scarcely-veiled references to British tabloid headlines concerning Germans. Indeed, while being asked a question from the audience relating to that, it was clear that he feels time ought to have healed more than it apparently has.

But the main thrust of his talk was focussed on the present Euro crisis and the relative roles that Germany and Britain could play in resolving it. As a CDU politician, he is very much at odds with Britain’s strategy of borrowing its way out of recession. He was swift to admit that his own Land has run a budget deficit for every year since its inception in 1947 (although he ruefully acknowledged that the 1946 budget had been balanced by the last British Military Commander—another Scot called Macreadie).

There was, in his view, no long-term alternative to austerity. In 2008 when the present crisis first hit, Germany had tried borrowing. But the availability of the cash had made strict adherence to spending plans difficult and that experiment had, in his view, failed. He is clearly a disciple of Angela Merkel (and, indeed, has even been spoken of as a possible successor to her) and, perhaps because the German press corps was present in some numbers, never deviated from her present line of strict adherence to the Fiscal Compact and the European Stability Mechanism.

Discussion did not come round to whether both compact and mechanism were robust enough to deal with whatever outcome the Greek elections due on June 17th might bring and to deal with the run on Spanish banks undermined by their ongoing property bust. He simply reiterated that the sole path available out of the present crisis was a trimming of outlays to match income, no matter what pain that cost. Queried about German resentment for others’ profligacy, he accepted Germans, who now retire at 67, resent Greeks retiring much earlier but that was a matter the Greeks themselves had to solve. For him, the key was that Greece or Spain were still better off staying with the Euro.

Because of cultural and manufacturing similarities, he saw Britain as an ally, despite it remaining outside the Eurozone and pursuing a borrowing strategy of which he could not approve. But when asked whether the relative openness of the Scots to Europe and the international community might not be used as a bridgehead to circumvent English euroscepticism, he became non-committal. Clearly there was a diplomatic reluctance to take any sides in the independence debate and. despite reference to our historic links with Hanseatic ports, an underrated fiscal rectitude around the North Sea as well as the Baltic and a social conscience common across Northern Europe, he was not about to use his personal links to further any such ‘special’ relation with Scotland.

Reading between his statements, it was clear that he regards all of Germany as a single political state and the 16 Länder exist as vehicles to allow local differences of culture and character. He was clear that any fiscal disparities within Germany were simply tasks to be completed, rather than any reason to question the unity of Germany. The present structure whereby economic investment was prioritised towards the former East Germany would be reviewed in 2019. With a wry smile, he suggested that date might be Germany’s equivalent to the 2014 that was receiving much attention in Scotland.

Disappointed as I was that the prospect of a ‘special relation’ with Scotland was elegantly sidestepped, in contrast to the ‘light-touch’ ZDF treatment, this lecture was as thoughtful, pragmatic and fluent a presentation on the present Germany and its relations with us as you could hope to cram into 90 minutes. We’ve not heard the last of Herr MacAllister.

Posted in Commerce, Politics | Leave a comment

Do You Know Who I Used to Be?

Posted on June 5, 2012 by davidsberry

Zero Mostel’s classic line from The Producers had special resonance this weekend. Despite the weather and Philip’s hospitalisation, the jubilee seems to have gone off well and those many enthusiasts well pleased with events. I tried to watch the concert but it became increasingly surreal, with the Welsh (in the shape of Tom Jones & Birly Chassis) blowing the rest of Britpop royalty off the stage.

Most touching was the Thames pageant of over 1,000 boats, for which Pageantmaster Adrian “Canute” Evans had managed to get the Thames Barrier closed for the day so that they didn’t have to contend with 5-knot runs and the 7m rise and fall that a spring tide visits on the Pool of London and all who sail on her.

It was touching because of the variety and enthusiasm with which the huge flotilla had been brought together. But it was also touching in a wistful way because of the glaring absence, for which this flotilla acted as a colourful distraction. Because this was the first jubilee in which a Spithead Review did not figure at all—let alone prominently. For the many pacifists among the readers, allow me to explain.

Since Trafalgar (over 200 years ago) Britain has been able to rely on its dominance of the seas to allow its global trade to pass unhindered. While gunboat diplomacy is now rightly a thing of the past, we still rely on ships to carry 93% of UK trade with the rest of the planet. As evidence of that power to control the seas, a feature of every jubilee has been a gathering of Royal Navy power in the Solent off Portsmouth for the celebrating monarch to review.

The most memorable was Victoria’s 1897 jubilee, equivalent to this one. Some 21 battleships, 44 cruisers and over 100 other ships gathered in serried grey ranks appearing to pave the entire Solent. That was even before HMS Dreadnought was launched and an Edwardian arms race of bigger, faster, greyer battleships culminated in WW1. The RN’s fleet had shrunk dramatically by the silver jubilee of 1977 but was still third-biggest (behind United States and Soviet Navies). Two aircraft carriers, including Ark Royal, two cruisers, one assault ship, 17 destroyers, 18 frigates, 14 submarines and dozens of minor vessels attended. The 18-or-so foreign ships present were dwarfed.

For this Queen’s golden jubilee a decade ago, a review (of sorts) was held but barely 20 RN ships of any size could be scraped together and the biggest warship there was French: the 35,000 ton aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle dwarfed anything the RN could deploy, and still does.

It turns out that all senior naval staff have been asked to stay shtum about the lack of any review for this jubilee. It’s not that we don’t have any ships (couple of assault ships, 20-ish destroyers and frigates, a dozen subs and many small craft and auxiliaries—about 70, all told), it’s just that they’re all busy. As a demonstration of force overstretch, it could hardly be bettered. Whether the monarch misses the review or might even prefer to go boating on the Thames has not been recorded.

But, as the MoD & Royal Navy still see fit to deploy 28 serving Admirals of varying stripes, the real question that must be asked: how we can afford to pay so many when they now outnumber the ships they have left to command?

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment

Veni; Vidi; Vicar

Posted on June 4, 2012 by davidsberry

Andrew Marr is usually good value, especially in the wilderness that is Sunday morning television. This week, despite the crush of Jubilee pressure, he did not disappoint, with a feisty performance against the Prime Minister over Hunt and leading Toynbee & Bremner into giving a livelier take on the papers than usual.

But what stopped me in my tracks was the interview with the eloquent the Right Honourable and Right Reverend Bishop of London, Richard Chartres. We’ll leave aside the fact that the cathedral of the same name may be the most brilliant edifice to man’s faith in the Western World and that his affable nature made the interview pleasurable in comparison to the rough-and-tumble Paxo-esque nature of most interviews on the show.

Chartres is also Dean of the Chapels Royal, which means, roughly speaking, he’s a vicar with parishioners at Buckingham Palace—hence his appearance to discuss, among other things, the continuing use of Fidei Defensor (defender of the faith) by the monarchy that still appears on all our coins, albeit reduced to “F.D.” these days. (It is rumoured that Charles does not wish to use this title, should he become monarch, which says much for his sense of propriety.) But, genial as he was, it was both the argument His Grace made and the assumed context within which he made it that got right up my nose.

First of all, the ‘F.D.’ bit. Granted by Pope Leo X in 1521 to a youthful Henry VIII for a treatise denouncing the protestant heresy being preached by Luther and his ilk, this was all made something of a travesty by Henry’s subsequent unilateral establishing in 1530 of the Church of England with himself conveniently as head so that he could use its vast wealth to pay off debts and fund his lifestyle. Although the title was revoked by Pope Paul III, Henry’s English parliament of lackies contrived to re-award it as “defender of the Anglican faith”, in direct contradiction of the original award.

When Unionists speak of the strength of tradition, I often wonder whether they mean to gloss over such dissolute effrontery to truth and principle or whether they operate the Orwellian model where we have always been at religious loggerheads with Eurasia. When Chartres tried to interpret the fuzziness of Latin translation (no definite articles) to mean ‘of faiths’, implying the importance of faith communities in holding society together, it just smacked of philosophical convenience.

What got my goat far more was the way His Grace regarded the Anglican Church ipse facto as the being establishment and that, despite declining numbers who attend Anglican services, could operate as a political wing of the monarchy and with their authority. There was, he averred, little mood for disestablishing the Church—i.e. removing the monarch as its head. Ministering to his own religious superior was not anomalous.

For a Scot—albeit a non-religious Scot like myself—all this makes me feel ignored. Leave aside that 16 Anglican bishops sit in the Lords while the Scots have none because they don’t believe in bishops. Leave aside that the 1707 Act of Union, for all its ugly flaws, did ensure that the Church of Scotland would not be part of the established Anglican church. We have a Scot like Marr, who should know better, chatting to a man who clearly thinks the Church of England is sole authority in such matters.

Far be it from me to dictate how the Anglican (or any other) Church operates within itself. It may well be a force for good and part of the complex weave that keeps society together. But even if the CofE no longer forbids Catholics being Head of State and accepts women as equal aspirants to the throne, we still inhabit Henry’s morally suspect 16th, rather than our enlightened 21st, century if someone accedes to be head of a church—much less head of state—simply by accident of birth. But the English, from His Grace on down, continue to fail to distinguish between England and its Union with us.

For us Scots, there is a simple solution to such arcane and morally suspect dilemmas: choose to be, not just in a country that once had no truck with such nonsense but in one reasserting its right as a sovereign state to again have no truck in future.

Posted in Community | Leave a comment

Dahn Sahff Inna Smoke, Innai?

Posted on May 28, 2012 by davidsberry

And so, for my first time this year, I made a pilgrimage to the Imperial Capital—and resplendent the old girl looks too in her much-delayed Spring sunshine finery. Having lived there for a number of years on-and-off, it’s a place I feel as much at home in as I do in any major city. Add in friends even more at home than I am and the novelty of metropolitan socialising can be so much fun.

Redevelopment around the Pool of London has added much variety to the more familiar haunts of Soho, Islington or King’s Road. Where once HMS Belfast pointed her big guns almost in self-defence she was so isolated, now a warren of quayside walks, refurbished warehouses and sundry bars and cafes gives the whole Southwark shore a cosmopolitan feel in contrast to the tourist ruck surrounding the Tower across the river.

HMS Belfast with Tower Bridge beyond from London Bridge Pier

Tucked into corners are a variety of places to discover, such as the Design Museum at Shad which is showing the definitive shoe designer Christian Louboutin’s work. Full of macho skepticism at first, I trailed round after the others, making quite a discovery in the process. Brought up in the rural-Scotland-functional school of footware, it took me until university before I strayed from conventional brown-or-black-with-laces orthodoxy.

This man is a sculptor: not just any sculptor but a man who obviously mainlines women’s psyche and has a sense of humour thrown in for good measure. His success could be tracked by the gasps, sighs and giggles emanating women of all ages taking their time to examine each and every creation. Just as well there was only one of each or the security nightmare would have been unmanageable.

Many of shoes must be regarded (even by women) as un-walkable (but not necessarily unwearable)—especially in the fetish section. But the huge majority on display seemed to inspire attendees with ambition and fantasies a-plenty. For people-watching as a male, it was one of the best venues I’ve ever come across.

The craftsmanship was obviously superb and the subtle selection of materials that complemented it gave me my first understanding of this whole shoes-as-psychology thing that women of my acquaintance failed to explain to me. It seems a combination of physical poise and psychic projection that makes emphatic statements to those who would hear.

Two of the More Wearable of the 2009-10 Louboutin Collection

Though there was whimsy aplenty, the quiet competence of shapes and styles demonstrated infinite variations on what is basically a very simple shape. One evening pump had small wings of the vamp that must make the wearer look like Mercury’s mistress; and otherwise standard gleaming black thigh boot had small pockets skillfully attached for the schoolmistress’s pencils, chalks and—perhaps—things less innocent.

Coming back upriver, we hopped on to one of the new river catamarans which now ply Putney-to-Blackfriars and Embankment-to-Woolwich. These are huge, fast maneuverable and a splendid new way to see London. Along with a variety of river cruises, private party boats and fast RIBs, the options available are quite bewildering. But they are easy to access at the half-dozen piers between Westminster and Tower Bridge—and with a frequency that you start to treat them as you would the Tube.

Catching Spiro Mirabilis at the Queen Elizabeth Hall was a concert like none I had attended before. Hardly a music buff, I’m nonetheless familiar with most of the classics and that includes Beethoven’s Pastoral. But it was laid out before me anew by the forty or so young Italians, Germans, Poles, etc who make up this conductorless orchestra. Much became clearer in a fascinating Q&A session after the performance.

Forty Young People Who Gave The Pastoral New Dimensions

Apparently, they rehearse together intensely, working out their approach to each phrase as a team. It takes much longer when there is not the single driving vision of a conductor leading the debate. But the net result is astonishing. It was the difference between canvas and lace. Whereas even a good orchestral performance drives at a steady pace through its phrasing, this was lyrical—groups of phrasings passed among members as they layered such ethereal tissues of music that billowed together only to float apart in a way Ludwig would surely have admired.

So, tucking in to duck and halibut al fresco just across from the Burlington Arcade wrapped the whole day up in a rather golden light (although the second bottle of Pinot Grigio may have had something to do with that). Despite some abrasive articles on its political dimensions over the last couple of years, it was uplifting to rediscover its world status as a destination after my varied travels. London did not disappoint—in fact it rose to exceed my jaded and hostile expectations to be a delight.

Shame it’s going to be a foreign country soon.

Dusk over the South Bank Centre from Charing Cross Footbridge

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Irrtumliche Weltanschauung

Posted on May 25, 2012 by davidsberry

A fascinating conversation flashed amongst the Twitterati yesterday on the unevenness of foreign  language teaching ability in Scottish primary schools, despite a recent move to introduce a second foreign language there. Let’s leave aside for a minute whether the Doric constitutes a foreign language and contemplate a few home truths: we’re shite at languages. And we’re not getting any better.

For over half a century, the brightest kids is Scottish schools have studied foreign languages (mostly French) S1-S4. And while our subsequent French graduates and scholars can hold their own, you don’t have to spend much time around tourist spots in France to hear their language being mangled by Brits from all parts of these islands—because it is not just the Scots who seem inept when it comes to using languages.

Scandinavian countries are famous for embarrassing us Scots in this department. To quote from the This Is Finland website (English-language, of course: my Finnish is non-existent):

“Finnish schools emphasize foreign language studies. The first foreign language is generally introduced in the third year of comprehensive school and the second domestic language (Swedish for Finnish-speaking pupils and Finnish for Swedish speakers) in the seventh year, if not sooner.

In addition, pupils may opt for up to six different languages by the completion of upper secondary level. The most common foreign languages are English, German, French, Russian and Spanish.”

For the avoidance of doubt their “comprehensive” means primary, not secondary, school which is entered after three years at nursery where much time spent exploring outdoors even in the -20degC Finnish winter—but that’s another blog.

You may not have encountered a Finn and had the chance to appreciate just how relaxed and articulate they are in speaking English. This is one of the subtleties we Scots seem poor at appreciating: the gulf between the ability to shop at a supermarket or order lunch and the fluency necessary to operate fully in that language. Once you can chat with a stranger on the phone (where there is no body language to help out), you’re getting close to being fluent.

Our schools have tried to improve the manner in which they teach languages by moving away from rote and ritual of declensions and cases a focussing more on how language is actually used. Our teaching graduates are no less capable than anyone else’s. We joined the EU 40 years ago. Why are we lagging so badly in the language race?

Our geographic position doesn’t help. Whereas foreign-speaking tourists pour into London in their millions, perhaps a tenth of those make it to Scotland and any Spanish-speaker found in Airdrie is almost certainly lost. So Scots lack much local opportunity to use any language skills they have gained. But, each year, we are finding more and more foreign tourists discovering Scotland and—when you think of it—Finland is even more disadvantaged by geography, so that can’t be a major reason.

A second reason may be that everyone seems to speak English anyway. There is much truth in this. Because of America’s cultural dominance of the planet from film to Coca-Cola, the bulk of the world’s technical manuals, films, TV programmes, games and much of its literature are all created in English. Spanish had its chance in the 18th century and Russian in the 20th but since the end of the Cold War, the lingua franca of the planet has been English and, unless the Chinese standardise one of their several languages and make it widespread beyond the Middle Kingdom, that will remain so.

It is galling to walk into a boulangerie, point to croissants and stutter “J’en veux deux, s’il vous plait” and be greeted with “with or without chocolate?” But this is deceptive. Though many can speak English, they are more at home in their own language and the ability to acknowledge this cuts considerable ice. Off the beaten track, especially with less common languages like Portuguese, even a few phrases do so much more for international relations than simply speaking louder in English.

Scots take too much comfort from the omnipotence of English, especially as a business language. Especially now that we are on the cusp of regaining some of our tarnished reputation for solid and creative engineering through top-notch oil services companies like Weir and Wood Group and the emerging renewables businesses, these will need to be sold around the world against competitors like the Danes whose English puts them on a par with us in that language and gives them the thick edge learning the customer’s.

But, perhaps most importantly, we Scots have lost the concept of a foreign policy that is our own. For three hundred years, we have been active participants in the British Foreign and Colonial offices as our windows on the world. As a colonial power, that brought much trade and more than a few glorious scuffles, culminating in WW2. Since then, from Korea to Afghanistan, UK foreign policy was still too influenced by the glory days of empire that has not moved with the times.

Though, thankfully, the phrase “wogs begin at Calais” gets little airing these days, that lies behind not just the BNP but the non-racial but nonetheless xenophobic positioning of UKIP, neither of which encourages the embrace of foreign culture, far less their language. Unfortunately, Scotland suffers from the same immigration restrictions, the same bossy border controls, the same faint disdain for things foreign among our officials that might have had basis when our gunboats dominated world trade—but has none now.

More than anything, this residue of greatness, this idea that once prevailed of “making the world England” still pervades much unionist thinking. There, at least, it has a logical basis. But in family homes across Scotland, few could handle non-English-speaking exchange students if they were to be billeted on them; few yet see the point of preparing for that or a similar eventuality. They would rather their children nailed another Higher and secured university entrance than that they had the fluency to live a gap year surfing in Biarritz and earn enough to save for uni while there.

Travel around Europe—Benelux especially—and you are struck not just be the open borders of Schengen but by the cultural flexibility with which business, products, services, transport, flow across borders, language barriers and old enmities. Cologne to Brussels or Lille to Utrecht, the only difference with Edinburgh to Glasgow is proper motorway with more lanes and less holdup. People there aren’t thinking in country boxes any more and languages are the keys to open up international possibilities.

This is what Scotland needs to learn: that languages aren’t just useful but essential for a 21st century nation with ambitions not just to sell to the world but to be seen as a willing and valued participant in it. At this point, the UK does not qualify. With a revival of attitude they once embraced in medieval times, an independent Scotland could.

But it will take business to demand language skills in their new hires, government to support that far-sighted initiative and parents to understand that their Micky Mechanic or Eloise Engineer will get twice the salary and see more of the world if they can talk Halbleitertechnik and not just semiconductors. Putting part-qualified teachers into primary schools will not be enough: it will remain an initiative without a context.

And we need to grasp this particular thistle as a country fast—before we’ll also have to consider Urdu or Mandarin as further essential languages to introduce at primary level.

Posted in Education | Leave a comment