There has often been talk of needing a third runway at Heathrow, though now the question is more clearly, why? Please don't tell me that an additional runway would have meant the recent chaotic response to a little snow would have been alleviated, it wouldn't. The problem at Heathrow is the people that run it, not the amount of tarmac.
It was fair, we were told that Heathrow should not 'invest' in adequate snow clearing equipment as it doesn't snow much in Britain. Or to put that another way, Britain should accept that when it snows, Heathrow will shut. Well, they said, when you put it like that.......
And so £32 million is spent on more ploughs etc and the next time it snows, the airport management, not to be caught out this time, swing into action, cancelling flights before the snow arrives. Ah, was the latest claim, we needed to 'build slack' into the system to allow for the extra time it takes to de-ice aeroplanes. But you de-ice when it is cold, not just when it snows and every other airport seems to be managing. Amsterdam, which isn't closer to the Arctic and therefore bursting with winter equipment, kept open even taking additional flights because Britain couldn't cope!
When asked how long the chaos would continue, the airport guy at Heathrow said, with stunning complacency, 'well, it depends how long it takes the airlines to get their planes back in the right places'. Yes, but they are only in the wrong place because of the disruption you caused.
Wednesday, 8 February 2012
Colonialism
There seems to be some misunderstanding about colonialism floating around the world these days. I blame the Lefties who have been talking tripe (do they ever do anything else?) about it for decades. Colonialism is when one country takes over another, often by force and without regard to the wishes of the people currently living in the country. Which brings me on to this letter, a reply from the UN to the Argentine President, Cristina Kirchner.
Dear President Kirchner,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding a number of issues currently pertaining to the South Atlantic region. Firstly, I would like to congratulate you on selecting the UN as the body best able to assist you in your international dispute with the United Kingdom.
Looking back at our records I see this has cropped up before, in 1982, when the UN helpfully, I think, passed Resolution 502, which also addresses your current claim that the region has been militarised, as the Resolution called for the invading Argentine forces to withdraw from the Islands and for both sides to refrain from using force. Naturally, the UN is very much on your side because of our childish and poorly thought out policies on 'colonialism'.
Argentina was created in 1816 by throwing off the yoke of the Spainish colonial power, becoming an independent country and claiming the Falklands Islands as a colony. Which is obviously fine as any land 400+ miles away is bound to belong to that country. After having a spat with the Americans the Spanish/Argentines were thrown off the Islands and the British snuck up, in 1833 and claimed the Islands (again) for Britain and it has stayed that way ever since.
Naturally, the UN supports the idea of self determination and as the Islands have almost never had any Argentines living there, the population is and wishes to remain British. It is hard therefore, to substantiate your claim that it is provocative of the Islands to have amongst them a member of their own Royal Family. I have, for instance never received a complaint from Ireland when a British Prince visits Wales.
I fear I may have to further disappoint you, by finding that the sending of a warship to the region is not in effect 'militarisation' but, sadly what often happens when a local power starts making threats. Overall then, it seems plain to us at the UN that Argentina is threatening military action, which we cannot condone, in order to obtain a colony in the name of repudiating colonialism. Maybe if your thinking was a tad clearer, you would not be in the mess in Argentina that requires the distraction of a foreign military adventure. Which I'm sure also has no connection with the recent drilling in the area of the Islands.
My military aide also suggests that I urge caution on your part as he says, you should remember that your Air Force, whilst having had a noble tradition is mainly held together with string and sealing wax these days, that your Navy returned to port and stayed there the first time a ship was attacked and your Army saw its officers run away whenever possible and treated the ordinary soldiers with contempt. Soldiers who were massively surprised on arrival not to find themselves in the role of liberators, having been taught at school that the people are forced to remain 'British', but instead as invaders and as such, were detested.
I gather that this didn't upset them too much as no-one wanted to stay on the wind blown place and that it reminded them of the part of Argentina no-one lives in.
Now, if you will excuse me, I have to deal with others like you in Syria and elsewhere.
Dear President Kirchner,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding a number of issues currently pertaining to the South Atlantic region. Firstly, I would like to congratulate you on selecting the UN as the body best able to assist you in your international dispute with the United Kingdom.
Looking back at our records I see this has cropped up before, in 1982, when the UN helpfully, I think, passed Resolution 502, which also addresses your current claim that the region has been militarised, as the Resolution called for the invading Argentine forces to withdraw from the Islands and for both sides to refrain from using force. Naturally, the UN is very much on your side because of our childish and poorly thought out policies on 'colonialism'.
Argentina was created in 1816 by throwing off the yoke of the Spainish colonial power, becoming an independent country and claiming the Falklands Islands as a colony. Which is obviously fine as any land 400+ miles away is bound to belong to that country. After having a spat with the Americans the Spanish/Argentines were thrown off the Islands and the British snuck up, in 1833 and claimed the Islands (again) for Britain and it has stayed that way ever since.
Naturally, the UN supports the idea of self determination and as the Islands have almost never had any Argentines living there, the population is and wishes to remain British. It is hard therefore, to substantiate your claim that it is provocative of the Islands to have amongst them a member of their own Royal Family. I have, for instance never received a complaint from Ireland when a British Prince visits Wales.
I fear I may have to further disappoint you, by finding that the sending of a warship to the region is not in effect 'militarisation' but, sadly what often happens when a local power starts making threats. Overall then, it seems plain to us at the UN that Argentina is threatening military action, which we cannot condone, in order to obtain a colony in the name of repudiating colonialism. Maybe if your thinking was a tad clearer, you would not be in the mess in Argentina that requires the distraction of a foreign military adventure. Which I'm sure also has no connection with the recent drilling in the area of the Islands.
My military aide also suggests that I urge caution on your part as he says, you should remember that your Air Force, whilst having had a noble tradition is mainly held together with string and sealing wax these days, that your Navy returned to port and stayed there the first time a ship was attacked and your Army saw its officers run away whenever possible and treated the ordinary soldiers with contempt. Soldiers who were massively surprised on arrival not to find themselves in the role of liberators, having been taught at school that the people are forced to remain 'British', but instead as invaders and as such, were detested.
I gather that this didn't upset them too much as no-one wanted to stay on the wind blown place and that it reminded them of the part of Argentina no-one lives in.
Now, if you will excuse me, I have to deal with others like you in Syria and elsewhere.
Friday, 3 February 2012
Huhne Resigns
Comedy stand-in politician Chris Huhne has resigned, as he has been charged with perverting the course of justice. Following a disclosure by his ex wife that she had been asked by her husband to take the penalty points for a speeding offence, so he could keep his licence (he already had 9 points on it -pity he got caught using his mobile whilst driving shortly after), Essex police spent eight months thinking about it and then decided, yes it is an offence and perhaps they should consider treating the Member of Parliament as if the law applied equally to him (this not being the way such people like to be considered).
The justice system certainly seems diligent (lax?) in its treatment of politicians, except of course when Labour, in office made some unsubstantiated claims about a Conservative MP, when the police showed their willingness to ignore the law and arrested the man pointed out by the government and searched his house. As an exercise in showing political corruption and the compliance of senior police officers to their political 'masters', it can hardly be beat.
I think that Vicky Price (ex Mrs Huhne) should be warned regarding the seriousness of lying to the criminal justice system and then told to go. She broke the law, but she eventually came clean and her actions are certainly 'in the public interest'. By getting rid of Huhne from government she does the country a great service. The villain himself though, weasel that he is, should be sent to prison for a considerable time pour encourager les autres and because we cannot sentence him for the crimes committed against us as taxpayers, because it is legal for politicians to lie to us and steal from us, apparently.
If we all offer up a prayer, perhaps we can have the plans and policies that this nincompoop zealot was pushing through, to see how much damage he could do, reversed. Climate Change is a scam and whilst it is possible that Chris Huhne actually is thick enough to have been taken in by it, either way he is gone and we need some sanity injected into this part of government. Perhaps by deleting it as a department and creating energy policies that return power to the people (pun intended in every way) and do something that will keep the lights on. I think Huhne's back-up plan for wind energy was pixie dust.
I suppose with the Goodwin and Hester stuff kicking around, the staunch big government, I know best Labourite Keir Starmer at the CPS thought that he had better just act within the law, on this occasion. I can't imagine anything else would have motivated him to take such action, I mean its not as if Huhne is a Conservative or anything.
The justice system certainly seems diligent (lax?) in its treatment of politicians, except of course when Labour, in office made some unsubstantiated claims about a Conservative MP, when the police showed their willingness to ignore the law and arrested the man pointed out by the government and searched his house. As an exercise in showing political corruption and the compliance of senior police officers to their political 'masters', it can hardly be beat.
I think that Vicky Price (ex Mrs Huhne) should be warned regarding the seriousness of lying to the criminal justice system and then told to go. She broke the law, but she eventually came clean and her actions are certainly 'in the public interest'. By getting rid of Huhne from government she does the country a great service. The villain himself though, weasel that he is, should be sent to prison for a considerable time pour encourager les autres and because we cannot sentence him for the crimes committed against us as taxpayers, because it is legal for politicians to lie to us and steal from us, apparently.
If we all offer up a prayer, perhaps we can have the plans and policies that this nincompoop zealot was pushing through, to see how much damage he could do, reversed. Climate Change is a scam and whilst it is possible that Chris Huhne actually is thick enough to have been taken in by it, either way he is gone and we need some sanity injected into this part of government. Perhaps by deleting it as a department and creating energy policies that return power to the people (pun intended in every way) and do something that will keep the lights on. I think Huhne's back-up plan for wind energy was pixie dust.
I suppose with the Goodwin and Hester stuff kicking around, the staunch big government, I know best Labourite Keir Starmer at the CPS thought that he had better just act within the law, on this occasion. I can't imagine anything else would have motivated him to take such action, I mean its not as if Huhne is a Conservative or anything.
NHS Reform
The NHS, say GP's doesn't need reform. Well, actually they aren't saying that, just that the entire reform package currently proposed is wrong. Can that really be true? Bearing in mind the stunning rate at which the NHS is now killing people, has some reforming zealot MP only come up with things that will make it worse?
Despite being very careful to recruit large numbers of Managers, who are constantly in receipt of helpful advice in the form of reports about how exactly they managed to kill a specific person (or group of people recently) and how they might avoid it in future, management ineptitude in the organisation trundles on at a high level. GP's say the reforms will damage joined up healthcare, but it doesn't exist now so what are they wittering on about?
At the base of it all, you get the distinct impression that all of these objections to change are about money. What did GP's do when offered a massive pay rise by Blair? Took it and voted for him. Bonuses to do the night cover you have always done? No thanks, they said, what with the doubling of my salary I'll forgo the bit extra and all the hassle (work) that goes with it.
Recently, courses were run using first year medical students to teach GP's resuscitation techniques. Personally, I would have hoped they would have been up to speed on such stuff, you know, joined up heathcare -sick people come to see you, possibly collapsing etc. I wonder what else they are a bit hazy on?
We know that an unworkable bureaucracy has been allowed to thrive within the NHS and this needs fundamental reform, but also the attitudes and functioning of the medical class has also gone awry. Doctors seem to make a lot of mistakes these days, nurses having been given higher levels of training no longer remember how to feed people, or that hydration is important. Patients are not treated as people with medical problems, they are paperwork in a process.
My own experience of the compartmentalised approach to medicine that is practised in our NHS is that, if they think you have cancer they will spend months trying to prove it is, then finding it isn't they will pass you on to another specialism, to let them have a go at finding what is wrong with you. The patients welfare, let alone life are irrelevant in this system, as the only interest is in going through the motions.
The reform that is really needed is radical and at a fundamental level; we must address the culture of the organisation. A culture that now opposes reform stating patient care, but is actually solely motivated by self interest. The NHS is not a bad idea, just a very bad organisation from its roots.
Despite being very careful to recruit large numbers of Managers, who are constantly in receipt of helpful advice in the form of reports about how exactly they managed to kill a specific person (or group of people recently) and how they might avoid it in future, management ineptitude in the organisation trundles on at a high level. GP's say the reforms will damage joined up healthcare, but it doesn't exist now so what are they wittering on about?
At the base of it all, you get the distinct impression that all of these objections to change are about money. What did GP's do when offered a massive pay rise by Blair? Took it and voted for him. Bonuses to do the night cover you have always done? No thanks, they said, what with the doubling of my salary I'll forgo the bit extra and all the hassle (work) that goes with it.
Recently, courses were run using first year medical students to teach GP's resuscitation techniques. Personally, I would have hoped they would have been up to speed on such stuff, you know, joined up heathcare -sick people come to see you, possibly collapsing etc. I wonder what else they are a bit hazy on?
We know that an unworkable bureaucracy has been allowed to thrive within the NHS and this needs fundamental reform, but also the attitudes and functioning of the medical class has also gone awry. Doctors seem to make a lot of mistakes these days, nurses having been given higher levels of training no longer remember how to feed people, or that hydration is important. Patients are not treated as people with medical problems, they are paperwork in a process.
My own experience of the compartmentalised approach to medicine that is practised in our NHS is that, if they think you have cancer they will spend months trying to prove it is, then finding it isn't they will pass you on to another specialism, to let them have a go at finding what is wrong with you. The patients welfare, let alone life are irrelevant in this system, as the only interest is in going through the motions.
The reform that is really needed is radical and at a fundamental level; we must address the culture of the organisation. A culture that now opposes reform stating patient care, but is actually solely motivated by self interest. The NHS is not a bad idea, just a very bad organisation from its roots.
Thursday, 2 February 2012
Police Headline News
Police testing new laser that can tell if you are wearing a seatbelt or using a mobile phone, from half a mile away. Still hopeless at catching criminals.
Wednesday, 1 February 2012
Shred The Fred
Back to plain old Mr. Goodwin then. Pity, it is never nice to see a greedy man, operating way above his abilities being humiliated. But then again, yes it is. And that is why it was done. The government may not change what they do, they may not attack the fundamentals of bank bonuses, they may not stop giving gongs to dodgy people, but by God if there is an ounce of political capital to be had in taking away your knighthood, they are on it.
Clearly this imbecile should never have been given the award, but then when an imbecile of the calibre of Gordon Brown is running the country, what should we expect? The bankers are fundamentally safe from real attacks by politicians because their crimes are shared and the expenses scandal is such a parallel with the banking crisis; both were fostered by greed and hubris.
The banking crisis, which was caused by socialist interference on both sides of the Atlantic*, is only one of a group of ridiculous policies and actions that international politics is responsible for currently. Not only have we flushed unimaginable sums down the toilet via the banks, we have done the same by following the global warming (climate change) scam -again, left wing politics- and by staying in, nay, supporting the EU.
Your politicians will be back on track when all three of these are abolished.
*The banking collapse was caused by, in the UK Gordon Brown allowing too much dodgy dealing just for the tax revenue he thought he would get on the back of it -and Tony Blair for the money that could be directed to his own pocket- and in the US where 'Democrats' introduced legislation forcing banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford them.
Clearly this imbecile should never have been given the award, but then when an imbecile of the calibre of Gordon Brown is running the country, what should we expect? The bankers are fundamentally safe from real attacks by politicians because their crimes are shared and the expenses scandal is such a parallel with the banking crisis; both were fostered by greed and hubris.
The banking crisis, which was caused by socialist interference on both sides of the Atlantic*, is only one of a group of ridiculous policies and actions that international politics is responsible for currently. Not only have we flushed unimaginable sums down the toilet via the banks, we have done the same by following the global warming (climate change) scam -again, left wing politics- and by staying in, nay, supporting the EU.
Your politicians will be back on track when all three of these are abolished.
*The banking collapse was caused by, in the UK Gordon Brown allowing too much dodgy dealing just for the tax revenue he thought he would get on the back of it -and Tony Blair for the money that could be directed to his own pocket- and in the US where 'Democrats' introduced legislation forcing banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford them.
Retailing Woes
So let me understand this from the recruitment perspective. A global brand want someone to run all of their retailing side, maintaining the image already established (and responsible for healthy profit margins). Naturally, the ideal candidate will have supermarket experience and more recently have run a business selling computers and technology products based on a 'sale', 'half price' strategy and who's international experience is closing overseas operations. Naturally.
Of course the actual reason given for Apple attracting Dixons boss John Browett is his fantastic customer service focus. I certainly can't fault him for having talked about it often enough, but my own personal experience recently was of an inept, unconnected organisation that cannot use its own computer systems and fail to interface with delivery firms correctly. OK, so you don't get so hounded when you go into a store these days as you once did, but he has definitely not got on top of the way the customer should be dealt with in such a company. The staff still don't know any more about what they are 'selling' than they did 5 years ago.
But good luck to Browett and even more so Apple. Will he bring his own ideas to the table and change the translucent white brand into something closer to his 'pallet' mentality, with lots of (fake) 'half price' offers? Or, sit back and do nothing at all, letting the marketing people create a desire and the customers to do the rest. It's a strategy.
Does this mean the Tesco era is over at Dixons? I think Browett's sidekick from that neck of the woods should be being looked at by Argos. They share a demographic, chasing the same customer segment, the range is vast, image low, but it is a real sector and it could be better done. He might be the man to fill that long-standing senior vacancy at Argos, but do the people above have the vision to recognise the kind of change that is required in their business? To date nothing suggests they do.
For Dixon's the departure of someone who clearly hasn't been that interested for quite a while now, presents a real opportunity. Let's see if they grasp it. The Industrial Revolution is so called because of the vast, fundamental changes it introduced. It wasn't called the Industrial Musical Chairs, in which people carry on doing what everyone has always done, but moving chairs occasionally.
Of course the actual reason given for Apple attracting Dixons boss John Browett is his fantastic customer service focus. I certainly can't fault him for having talked about it often enough, but my own personal experience recently was of an inept, unconnected organisation that cannot use its own computer systems and fail to interface with delivery firms correctly. OK, so you don't get so hounded when you go into a store these days as you once did, but he has definitely not got on top of the way the customer should be dealt with in such a company. The staff still don't know any more about what they are 'selling' than they did 5 years ago.
But good luck to Browett and even more so Apple. Will he bring his own ideas to the table and change the translucent white brand into something closer to his 'pallet' mentality, with lots of (fake) 'half price' offers? Or, sit back and do nothing at all, letting the marketing people create a desire and the customers to do the rest. It's a strategy.
Does this mean the Tesco era is over at Dixons? I think Browett's sidekick from that neck of the woods should be being looked at by Argos. They share a demographic, chasing the same customer segment, the range is vast, image low, but it is a real sector and it could be better done. He might be the man to fill that long-standing senior vacancy at Argos, but do the people above have the vision to recognise the kind of change that is required in their business? To date nothing suggests they do.
For Dixon's the departure of someone who clearly hasn't been that interested for quite a while now, presents a real opportunity. Let's see if they grasp it. The Industrial Revolution is so called because of the vast, fundamental changes it introduced. It wasn't called the Industrial Musical Chairs, in which people carry on doing what everyone has always done, but moving chairs occasionally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)