The Gravy Train hits the buffers....

The Great March against Government spending cuts drove Libya off the front pages for a day or so. I am surprised that none of the commentators has analysed the real position of public servants facing the chop, so here’s a few observations of mine culled from experience.

It is unlikely that they will be forced, starving, onto the streets to sell the Big Issue. Many senior staff will be on fixed term contracts with ‘loss of office’ compensation clauses. In the case of local government, over-50s will be able to take early retirement. Pensions are calculated on 40/80ths (i.e. the pension accrues at one 80th of salary for each year of service) so after serving 40 years there is a full pension of 50% of final salary. This is index linked. There is an ‘added years’ provision so that the employer can add up to 10 years to the length of pensionable service. Thus a person age 50 with 30 years’ service could retire on a full pension. In most cases severance packages should provide a fairly comfortable exit. (The exception to this is MPs, whose pensions are 20/40ths – nice!).

My guess is that the public service will not get a great deal of sympathy. It seems to have lost a great deal of respect in recent years. I can think of two possible reasons.

The first is that there seems to be a widespread feeling that it is no longer the apolitical sector of tradition. Some senior appointments have gone to political activists. Recruitment is often through the public appointments pages of the Guardian which on Wednesdays groans under the load of advertisements. There is some suspicion that the public service was politicised during the Blair years – there are now reports that Cameron is having trouble with his Civil Servants bordering on defiance.

There is also criticism of salaries and benefits. Years ago working in the public service meant lower salaries than in the private sector in return for job security, a good pension at age 60 and generous leave and other provisions. Now one frequently hears ‘fat cats’ as the description of senior officials because of salaries that have outstripped the private sector with little of the risk. Local authorities have attracted particular attention from the media.

A particular example is the Chief Executive of a large local council who has had the unforgiving attentions of Private Eye for ages and who has recently featured in the national press – very unfavourably.

The essence of the criticism is that this official earns around £250,000 a year, substantially more than the PM, plus all the fringe benefits, of course. To get an idea of how top salaries have escalated, years ago the top salary in a local authority would be about 6 to 8 times the lowest. This one is about 12 times; the relative salary has thus more or less doubled in recent years.

Over the past few years the media satirists have had a great harvest of non-jobs in the public sector – outreach advisors and the rest – and I deny any sentient human being to be able to comprehend some of the job descriptions, which appear to be words chosen at random and without any meaning. Having said which the DT today had a headline reading ‘City boys’ e-mail goes viral’. What does that mean? ‘Viral’ means caused by a virus. So perhaps it is not only the public sector that mangles language.

Quote of the week

Rod Liddle in the Speccie:-

‘There are a few lessons to be learned from Japan, mind – the obvious ones, I suppose.

1) Never trust a thing told to you by a large corporation.

2) Never trust a thing told to you by your government.

3) Never, ever, trust anything told to you by an “expert” being interviewed on a rolling news channel’

Exploding underwear.......

My reference to Niall Ferguson, the decline of the Ottoman Empire and its lack of any real intellectual contribution to the world provoked an energetic debate.

One view was that the intellectual stimulus came from the Greeks and Jews who were forced to convert and integrate, the implication being that Arabs created nothing of value. The weakness of this, I feel, is, first that the Middle East was the cradle of civilisation – the great cities of Aleppo, Byblos, Damascus, and so on were centres of learning from time out of mind. Secondly, learning in the Arab world continued to influence Europe for 1000 years after the fall of Rome.

This led to another topic, the hatred between Jews and Muslims.

Some say this goes back to the Prophet Mohammed. I am not so sure. My feeling is that this is a modern manifestation arising from increasing Jewish emigration to Palestine from the late 19 Century until the present. If I have understood Paul Johnson correctly in his magisterial ‘History of the Jews’ both Jews and Christians were tolerated under the Caliphate as ‘people of the book’. Jews held high office in the Caliphate partly for their competence and partly because they were seen to be disinterested. In many instances Jews prospered mightily in the Ottoman Empire. Bankers such as the Rothschilds and Sassoons were Middle East businessmen who set up branches in London and Paris.

Are the current upheavals in Arab countries related to hostility towards Israel? Any connection seems tenuous to the point of invisibility. And another thing; since our gallant lads in Libya are enforcing a ‘no fly’ zone, why are they attacking ground targets? I only asked.

Another attitude is that Muslims are terrorists because they are Muslim. On this reasoning the Omagh bombers who blew to bits young mothers and children were terrorists because they were Catholic. I prefer to believe that they are terrorists because they are thoroughly evil.

My guess is that ‘alienated’ Muslim youth are candidates for exploding underwear because of frustration and envy. They see their kaffir counterparts having the life of Riley – binge-drinking, fornicating, producing illegitimate kids so they can live on ever-increasing state benefits that in turn finance the stock-in-trade of their drugs-dealing sidelines – and they want a slice of it but can never get it.

Biting the hand that stops feeding them...........

Predictably, NATO will now take over enforcement of the no fly zone in Libya. As the US largely controls NATO, there is not much difference between our air marshals or other military brass being in charge or NATO itself. The move does, however, take some of the pressure off O who seems to have committed to an engagement with Libya without informing Congress. Needless to say, Congress is pissed off and, as it now enjoys an opposition majority, is making a meal out of the situation.

There is already talk here of an exit strategy for Libya. The best comment I heard on that subject is that an exit strategy is not mandatory, cannot be predicted and for those reasons should be abandoned altogether. Let's stop talking about an exit strategy and begin using our common sense.

 Had that prevailed in the first place, we would not have become engaged in Libya. The administration here seems to believe that we are involved in a weekend war that will be over by month's end. Nobody that I have read or listened to spoke about the internal nature of the rebellion until recently.

Now, the more savvy pundits, are speaking about conflicts between the main Bedouin tribes of Libya and dissatisfaction by the have nots, i.e. people who are not from Gadaffi's tribe. What's more, a slight current of opinion is gaining momentum that the primary rebelling tribe, from Eastern Libya, is much more dedicated to Islamic fundamentals and more easily radicalized than the ruling tribe.

We shall see how that plays out, but what is absolutely clear to me is that as per usual the US has gotten itself involved in something it does not understand and with the highly plausible prospect that those who we are aiding will return to bite us. Indeed, the Arabs have a penchant for biting the hand that stops feeding them.

Japanese fall-out........or not?

My friend Douggie, the designer of the ‘Canute’ tidal power generator and possessed of an enquiring mind, is curious about reports of panic buying on the west coast of the US because of the prospect of radio-active fall-out arriving from the nuclear disaster in Japan, carried by the jet-stream. As the jet stream was there in 1945 also, he asks why was there no fall-out from Hiroshima and Nagasaki when the nuclear detritus was vastly greater? Ditto the many nuclear test explosions carried out in the Pacific in the ‘50s and ’60s? Or has the whole thing been yet another example of the breathless and semi-hysterical reporting style that is the current fashion?

The Japan coverage has also been notable for its non-reporting. There has been no looting. Well, fancy that! There has been no panic. Bless my soul! The people have been getting stuck-in to put things right. Would you believe it! Unfair to journos!

Outside The Economist it is getting increasingly difficult to get serious news coverage and comment. The print version of the Telegraph now looks like a tabloid with banner headlines and the rest. TV news is endlessly repetitive. Sometimes the various channels run the same story for four hours. Vast amounts of space are given over to stuff about selebs and other garbage. I suspect that one reason for this is that TV now has to provide 24 hours news coverage (why?) so it has a great deal of time and space to fill. Another reason may be that internet news has sharpened competition enormously.

We now watch Al Jazeera. AA Gill, the Sunday Times TV critic rates it as the best news channel with excellent coverage and quality reporting. I started to watch it last year because it was the only news service that reported the trouble in Thailand in any depth or detail – important to us because we were about to depart for Chiang Mai. It is not the PR department of Al Qaeda as Dubya seemed to believe.

Going green.

ActionAid and other campaign groups are claiming that, due to deforestation, emissions associated with the EU’s biofuel targets could be up to six times higher than fossil fuel equivalents, and will also create huge social upheaval with communities losing their land, homes and jobs.

It will all end in tears........ours!

My goodness, our Dear Janet is on thin ice today in her article about O wanting to keep our of the Libya fray. Like so many others, Janet calls upon the founding fathers to justify her position that America should be the promoter and savior of human rights, freedoms and democracy around the world. I seriously doubt that our esteemed founding fathers intended to propel future generations of Yanks into military action against all the human rights violators around the globe. Our lads formulated some romantic and ideal phrases about governance in their efforts to justify rebellion against the throne. According to Janet, these phrases were not only meant to soothe our collective revolutionary conscience, but also to prescribe future congressional behavior.

I do not regret having severed our umbilical cord to English throne, Neither do I believe the best way to preserve democracy throughout the world is to ferment, foster and materially aid revolutionaries seeking to overthrow their dictatorial, corrupt or megalomaniacal leaders. Efforts to this effect are to me examples of cultural imperialism by Americans who possess a rather botched culture, are not imperial and who have almost zero understanding of other peoples and their cultures. We really need to stop this sophomoric silliness of exporting the principles of our founding fathers and cramming them into whatever context suits our purposes. Yes, there are rare times when we need to act, but policing the world is beyond our mandate.

Or am I wrong and O and co are intervening not on the basis of human principles, but a need for oil. After all, we just witnessed some nasty object lessons on the subject of why nuclear power will not become the energy of the future and we remain highly dependent upon and addicted to Middle Eastern oil. If Gadaffi with all his Libyan oil threatens to upset the apple cart like Saddam did in Iraq, then we must act quickly and decisively; in principle that is.

Our intervention in Libya will end in tears. Ours. The new regime will suck on our resources until we tire of offering them and will then come at us like harpies because we stopped feeding them. Their leaders will emerge in an aura of humanitarian and democratic proclamations that will endure until the public finds out how much aid and oil money they are channeling into their own pockets. That's the nature of the beast as I have learned from being there and having felt confounded in my inability to understand their mercurial and often rough behavior. The Libyans are, an Egyptian once explained to me, Bedouin tribesmen whose recent history is one of wandering desert trade routes while seeking water during the day and warmth at night. They can be hospitable and generous one moment and short and cruel the next.

The $ in the poo?............

Anent the suitability of Newt to be POTUS, the Economist did a league table of the potential Republican candidates. Their estimation of Newt was about the same – not enough brains and too much baggage. All other possibilities got a similar thraping to a greater or lesser degree, Romney being classed as smart but erratic and lacking in any clear set of principles. All in all, it made for rather depressing reading and invited the reaction ‘none of the above’.

Would it be unkind of me to suggest that they have an IQ of 180? Between them?

At this time it looks as if the Republican Presidential candidate is another of those known unknowns.

There are some financial commentators who see the ‘green shoots’ of economic recovery in the US. They appear to base this view on a small rise in retail sales, some growth in industrial production, a tiny fall in unemployment and stabilisation in the housing market. Are they clutching at straws?

The Federal debt is $14 trillion. I find it difficult to visualise that sum. If it was all in dollar bills how big would the pile be?

The annual interest is about $200 bn. There is the awful prospect of the US having to borrow just to pay the interest. Isn’t that what bankrupted New York some years ago? And isn’t that the basis of Ponzi schemes? Irwin ‘Alka’ Stelzer in the ST says that the debt is increasing by $4.5 billion every day.

Strewth!

Not reported in the print media is the release of the Pakistan spook Davis by acquittal under Sharia law. However, contrary to my prediction, the US did not pay a large sum in compensation to the family. Hilary says it is not true that $2 million was paid to get the guy back. Yeah, right. Of course, Hilary is perhaps disingenuous, the money having been paid by the Saudis to keep the US clean.

Malthus is over-rated.....

Ages ago, in the shadows of my youth, I clearly recall having spent some of my scarce pocket money on a Boy Scout Handbook. The cover featured a tidily uniformed young lad gallantly helping an elderly woman to cross an urban street. There are two reasons this image stuck with me. First, I wanted to be that young man with his tidy uniform and good intentions. Second, when the time came to begin university, I had some questions about the elderly woman. such as; did she really need assistance and did she want to cross the street at all.

Often in my consulting life in Africa and Asia I reflected on these images while preaching caution about America's penchant for being a good scout and performing good deeds. By the end of my international career my allegiances were more correctly guided by Clair Booth Luce's quip, 'no good deed goes unpunished'. While I don't regard our intervention in WWI and WWII as good deeds, I am of the opinion that our campaign to stamp out the evils of communism as in Korea and Vietnam, our efforts to curtail a tyrant as in Iraq and our determination to keep the world safe from Islamic terrorism as in Afghanistan were symptomatic of our Boy Scout culture. Those self righteous deeds are still being punished.

Indeed, the American culture is depicted in so many contradictory observations that it is not even clear to us who we are. My generation of Yanks was raised on the western film tradition of letting the bad guy draw first. The guy in the white had always managed to issue some fatal shots and win the heroine's affection for his efforts. Much later, 'shoot first and ask questions later' gained popularity. Many observers of America's history claim that we should have initiated pre-emptive strikes against some of our enemies, like Hitler, and were most successful when we did, like in the Spanish-American War.

Did we in fact take the poor and destitute of the world and make them into gentlemen and women? Hardly, but we live with that myth as well. Consider, for example, the remark of an American correspondent in Northeast Japan a few days ago who noted an absence of looting during the earthquake/tsunami aftermath. Discipline and honor apply to Japan, but many elements of our population at large can still be depended upon to profit from disaster and the misfortune of others. I just heard a psychic comment on why we were unable to more quickly and effectively respond to hurricane Katrina. The presenter posed this question with his thought that we did not know how. The psychic replied no, we knew how, corruption was the real culprit.

We should have learned by now that implementing an international policing action is more often punished than rewarded. I for one argue that it is neither in our nor Libya's interest for us, or other world powers, to militarily intervene on behalf of the revolutionaries. It now looks as if we will stay away from the fray, but it is yet early days and besides, America and the world's attention is intensively focused on Japan. And for good reason.

Japan is the only country to have experienced a nuclear bomb. We did it and now, they are victims of another attack; from a tsunami. When the Emperor spoke a few days ago, I knew their situation was dire. While everyone with even vestiges of humanity are hoping for a successful turn around of the situation, things only become worse. Several countries, including ours, are evacuating their citizens not only from the Fukushima area, but from Japan itself. The government has lost much face, partly because of wanting to paint an optimistic picture, and partly because of misinformation. Meanwhile, everyone who ever questioned the plant's design or construction is crowing to the tune of 'I told you so'.

The prophets of doom are having a heyday. They are delighted with the prospect of an accelerating Armageddon. Too many natural disasters are occurring for them to be ignored as coincidence. Sun spot activity is increasing to the point where warnings have been issued about disruptions in electrical and electronic equipment operations. The Telegraph gives Fukushima 48 hours to manifest itself as in or out of control, the US is placing radiation monitors on our West Coast and the UN advises us to expect the first radiation plume within days. It is a wonder we are all still alive with the world appearing to take revenge on the ills of overpopulation and environmental abuse.

I am content to see all of this as works of nature and nothing more. As for overpopulation, I expect Malthusian laws will eventually kick in. In fact, I think they are long overdue. Perhaps Malthus was overrated.

Newt is a nerd....

Perhaps I am prejudiced, but likely presidential candidate and former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich is a nerd. Has to be with a name like Newt. He is highly respected for his knowledge of government operations, rules, shortcuts, legal and practical limits, history and capabilities.

Pundits on the political right love him for his political genius and chat show personality. Yet, he recently explained his latest affair with an aide as having to do with being overworked at the office and unable to get home to his wife. That and his recent conversion to Catholicism remind me of a prudent Tony Blair.

I believe part of the reason America accepted John Kennedy as a Catholic was because he didn't behave like one. He was naughty, haughty and decidedly not doctrinaire. He was a Catholic by birth and not conviction which rather let him off the hook as far as the public was concerned.

Newt, on the other hand, has just found God, the true one? The only one? Newt has not yet confided these thoughts on the subject. I should think he should sit down and write a book and reflect on his past affairs rather than attempt becoming our head of state.

I would much prefer the Mormon, Mitt Romney who is not only brilliant but possesses common sense and a good measure of wisdom. He also has a sense of humor. When asked about the former Mormon practice of polygamy, he noted that he has had only one wife while some of our presidents have had more than that. He was undoubtedly referring to Reagan who had been divorced.

The heat is off the Libyan rebels as world attention is glued to Japan and the tsunami aftermath. One, possibly two of Japan’s nuclear power plants is seriously misbehaving giving rise to speculations of another Chernobyl scenario. In real politic terms, Japan has been downgraded with Dow Jones averages rising because a measurable chunk of demand for oil has been removed from the equation. With some demand pressure off oil, prices fall a bit and our stock market is happy with the prospect of Americans spending less on imported oil and more on consumer goods. The market shows no mercy while the final toll in human life is still being calculated.

Some American broadcasters panicked over the prospect of a tsunami hitting our West Coast, never mind Guam, Midway and Hawaii. Devastation was predicted by these few idiots and many Americans were in a dither over what might happen to our coastal resources. This was reminiscent of Orson Well’s 1930's radio broadcast depicting an invasion from outer space.

Most people, however, remained cool and were not overly concerned. Perhaps like myself, I could not see a huge shock wave maintaining its intensity all the way across the Pacific. At last count, we lost one life. A man in a group of three carried out to sea while they were taking pictures of the waves. Search and rescue efforts have been called off. Libya is off the map.

O continues to weigh his choices and options vis-a-vis Libya. Some of us feel that the rebels will all be dead by the time he makes up his mind. I still prefer to let the rebels fight it out without our material aid. If we do assist them, we will regret it. Arabs love us as long as we feed them and give them money.

Several stories have arisen over O and co being out of sinc with one another. Hillary says one thing, Defense Secy Gates another and both are chastised by O for not following the party line. The head of one of our multiple intelligence agencies was asked who he fears the most. He replied China and Russia. As he spoke, VP Biden was being entertained at the Kremlin in Moscow. A fine how-de-do.

I would be surprised if Hillary will be available for a go at a second term. It is difficult to find anything monumental that she has achieved as Secy of State. Indeed, she has been rather lackluster. Gates announced his intention to bail several months ago, so he should be leaving soon. Too bad, I think he is doing a good job and have consistently applauded O for carrying him over from the Bush government.

Gates recently gave a sensible reply to the press over questions about what we should do in Libya. He clearly replied that we need to carefully evaluate any action as the consequences could place us in an untenable position. One correspondent sighted the prospect of our sending humanitarian aid and having one of our ships attacked. ‘What would we do then?’ he asked.

I believe we are beginning to learn some lessons from the past, the past being Korea, Vietnam, Iraq I, Iraq II and Afghanistan. We must learn to think before we pull the trigger regardless of the emotions and pressures of the moment. I would put Gates in the luster category.

Libyan lash-up..........

It seems that my initial assessment of the Libyan fiasco was correct; another fine mess you’ve got us into, Willie. The whole episode was completely addle-pated. The SAS kill people; they are not Securicor minding some FO wallah from the Camel Corps. But the troops should have been on familiar ground; after all, it was only 2 years ago that the government sent a team of SAS to train the Libyans. Smart move.

I reckon our Foreign Secretary is due for an early bath. As Dave may well be if the Tories get monstered in the up-coming local elections.

With the country up the creek, the economy in the merde, and the public services down the drain, how is the Dear Leader responding? Why, he’s going to have ciggies sold in plain wrappings and under the counter, like rubber johnnies and dirty books when I was a lad. That should do it. At least the Nanny State has survived the budget cuts. Apropos which, we are told that 18,000 servicemen are to get the axe under the defence review. We are not told how many MOD civvies are to get the chop. Since there are more of them in the MOD and its satellites than there are people in uniform there must be enormous scope. Or not.

Question: What is Cameron’s ‘Big Society’? Answer: BS.

And I have no reason to change my initial reaction to the Prince Andrew nonsense. He is being castigated for hobnobbing with unsavoury foreign politicians in pursuit of business for UK firms. That’s his job. He apparently does it very well – for free! The DT is now bellyaching about his ‘friend’ Epstein landing his private jet at a RAF airfield. Well, that has nothing to do with Andrew; it’s up to the pilot-in-command. Anybody can land at a service airfield with prior permission. I have taken a tiddly Cessna into front line fighter stations, amidst Phantom jets roaring around me. But, as they say ‘any old stick........’

What appears to be doubly disgraceful is that there has been briefing (i.e. muck-raking) against Andy from within high government circles. Not good politics to use dirty tricks against royalty. He may not be the most liked member of the Firm but I can’t imagine the public taking too kindly to the crooks in Parliament striking moral attitudes against him. One comment was that ‘he has done little with his life’. Apart from a full career in the RN including active service in the Falklands, retiring with the rank of Captain, that is.

Justice – Brussels style.

The Times reports that 22-year-old Andrew Symeou is due to appear in court tomorrow in Greece after being arrested in 2008 under the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). Symeou was extradited to Greece in 2009 and spent almost one year in a Greek prison awaiting trial, before finally being granted bail last year. A leader in the Times notes, “Others worry that a warrant that was designed to speed up the extradition of people suspected of terrorism or organised crime is increasingly being applied to ordinary citizens, with too few safeguards.”

So this young fellow has been held in Greece for 3 years awaiting trial – and on very dodgy evidence. Magna Carta said ‘To none will we deny, nor delay, justice’. But that was before Blair abolished it, along with many other ancient rights and freedoms like the ‘double jeopardy’ rule.

Euronomics.

The CAP is now costing € 120 bn a year, which is greater than the value of Africa’s entire agricultural output. This compares with $20 bn spent by the US government. When grain prices are rocketing and food is getting scarce world-wide, the EU is subsidising the conversion of wheat and maize into bio-fuels. That should save the planet.

Immigration? Pas de probleme.

Another helpful ruling from the ECJ. Illegal immigrants are entitled to residence and a work permit if they produce a child during their stay in the EU. Births of convenience in place of marriages of convenience, then.

And finally......

I have discovered a good reason for the famous neglect of their teeth by the English. It is to safeguard their driving licences. I own a breathalyser. By way of experiment I tested my breath for alcohol. It came up with a reading of 22, about one drink. I then rinsed my mouth with mouthwash and took a second sample. It read 200! QED. Mouthwash contains a quantity of ethanol. Tell that to the Old Bill and they won’t believe you.

Islamsham democracy...

Churchill had it right when he noted that democracy is an imperfect system of government, but it is the best we have. What will become of the world should the Islamic fundamentalists find a strong political voice in a country such as Pakistan, or Yemen, or Saudi Arabia or Iran? The recent assassination of Pakistan's leading Christian politician Shahbaz Bhatti for his efforts to retract his country's blasphemy law vividly illustrates a major weakness in democracy; the assumption that the electorate is enlightened.

I don't believe I am being anti-Muslim or culture-bound when I suggest that the logical conclusion of awarding fundamentalist Muslims their political will shall result in war. Indeed, the climate of opinion in the USA is rapidly moving from anti-Muslim fundamentalist to simply anti-Muslim. Pakistan, Iran and scores of other Islamic countries and political institutions contribute to this trend. Fundamentalist Muslims continue to be hard at work radicalizing the weak of mind here in the US. Islam is a growing institution here.

From a different perspective, it is not the religious beliefs of a nation that are at fault, but rather the people themselves. It could be argued that Bhatti was as fanatic a Christian as Pakistan's majority are fanatic Muslims. Perhaps we should be looking at some sort of social susceptibility index that would scientifically categorize tribes of people, e.g. the Gauls, the Masai, the Gujarati, the Saxons, etc. into levels of gullibility with respect to following religious dictates. I suspect this would result in placing Mr. Bhatti in the same category as the rest of his tribe.

A major domestic issue here is whether or not O should intervene in Libya.

 The Daily Mail claims that both UK civilians and military (Black Watch) are on standby to assist the rebels in ousting Qadaffi. I am tempted to advise Dave and co to not assume the posture of the world's policeman as we have done here in the USA. However, I strongly suspect that the USA is in some sort of alliance with the UK and Italy and other European nations on this score. Whatever the West does by way of intervention in Libya will be viewed by opponents of O and by Muslim extremists and undoubtedly by most Libyans themselves in a negative manner.

Perhaps we should consider allowing the Libyan revolutionaries to win over the country by themselves. Then they would not be beholden to foreigners for gaining power. Assistance to the rebels, however, could well come in the form of political statements, encouragement for Qadaffi to resign, freezing certain bank accounts and even diverting material aid to the rebels.

We should remember, however, that we do not know the rebels, they have no acclaimed leader, and they could, and most probably would, end up very much like Qadaffi after several years in power.

Foreign aid is dead aid.....

I am unsure what to make of Andrew Mitchell, the Minister at DFID.

He is undoubtedly the best informed and most widely travelled Minister ever in the job, so he has better qualifications than any of his predecessors. One of his first moves was to stop business-class travel for DFID staff which may curb some of their jollies, and he has reviewed the whole of the DFID programme. However, he was recently making a spirited defence of the UK aid programme to India; this was rapidly followed by a statement that aid to 26 countries was being cancelled – including India. This U-turn smacks of an edict from on high.

But now we learn that among the countries to continue getting a slice of UK taxpayers’ money are such deserving cases as Burma (I thought we had sanctions against the Generals there), Zimbabwe (to pay for Mrs Bob’s Paris shopping trips?), Somalia (as it doesn’t have a functioning government who is there to steal the loot?), Pakistan (do they have the Taliban’s banking details?). But the wowsers have complained that not enough is going to oil-rich Angola and Nigeria.

He says that everything is up for scrutiny and it is his intention to ‘follow the money’. It could lead him into some interesting places. He might even ask about the success rates of aid programmes and whether they do actually help the poor.

There was a lengthy piece on TV about aid to Sierra Leone. The rural areas where the bulk of the population lives are devoid of even the most basic amenities. The needs of rural areas are clean water, fuel, sanitation, food, heath-care, and money-generating opportunities. In particular, the greatest part of a woman’s day is spent collecting water and firewood from increasingly distant sources.

Since gazillions of aid has been poured in since the end of ‘the troubles’ we have to ask why they are lacking the basics?

Some years ago when I was working in Nepal I had to visit a remote mountain village – so remote that we travelled miles in our SUV along dry river beds and eventually we had to walk a long distance, including crossing a rickety rope foot-bridge over a ravine.

In this particular village they had done some basic improvements. They had installed gutters for the roofs of their houses. They had put in large concrete water tanks. Clean water problem solved. They had installed a tank for all human and animal excrement. Sanitation problem solved. They had capped the tank to capture methane. Fuel problem solved. And it also produced high-grade fertiliser. They had built a small clinic staffed by a health assistant who could give basic treatment and dispense contraceptive advice and condoms..

As we entered the village after a fairly arduous trek, incredibly I saw a bus go past. The village women had got so fed up waiting for the authorities to connect them to the outside world that they had built the road themselves. A consequence was that they could now get their produce to market and enter the cash economy. Some had also set up small shops.

For a number of years the emphasis of aid programmes has been on ‘good governance’. My experience suggests that this is unachievable as presently conceived. Aid itself might be a contributing factor to ‘bad governance’. In some countries it accounts for 60% or more of national budgets. The effect of this is to cut the nexus between political accountability and levels of taxation, so that politicians cease to be answerable to their electorates on public spending. Many politicians in developing countries are irredeemably corrupt, but they are stealing money from other than the taxpayer.

Corruption in the public service arises from slightly different motivations – less from insatiable greed and more from economic reasons. There is a cycle. Senior officials, who are in powerful ‘rent-seeking’ positions, are often appallingly paid (£150 a month for a top official?). They are badly paid because tax revenues are low. Tax revenues are low because economies are weak. Economies are weak through lack of investment. There is little incentive for governments to encourage investment when they can fall back on aid for no effort.

Therefore, governance will not improve until economies improve. (Economies are also weakened by corruption and dirigisme; for example, in Bangladesh I identified 32 rent-seeking opportunities involved in a simple licence application. Catch-22?).

In her excellent book Dead Aid’ Dombisa Moyo, a Zambian economist points out that despite nearly 40 years of aid programmes many ‘developing’ countries are worse off. She suggests that aid is a comfort blanket that shields incompetent regimes from reality. She proposes that aid should be time limited so that recipient governments will know that they have, say, five years of help after which they are on their own.

So while this weird coalition increases aid by 27%, soldiers serving in Helmand are told they are about to be made redundant.

That should do wonders for morale.

More Euroballs..........

On his Telegraph blog, Nile Gardiner notes that in 2009 the EU subsidised several US anti-death penalty groups to the tune of €2.6m through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR). “It is bad enough that Brussels consistently interferes with the internal affairs of EU member states, but it is surely a bridge too far when it tries to intervene in the affairs of one of the world’s greatest democracies that isn’t even part of the EU,” he argues.

Are the recent decisions of the Fourth Reich on insurance (UK is by far and away the largest insurer in the EU), financial services (UK has the biggest market), and hedge funds (83% British) based on usual EU dottiness? Or could it be down to the age-old French policy of undermining Britain’s economic standing vis-a-vis France? I think we should be told.

Is Fairtrade a racket?

Fairtrade Fortnight will be here shortly. Despite its ‘do-good’ presentation it is really a marketing exercise. Fair trade is anything but. It offers only a very small number of farmers a higher, fixed price for their goods. Simple economics will tell you that these higher prices come at the expense of the great majority of farmers who are left even worse off because the Fairtrade subsidy unbalances normal market forces. It stands to reason that if you subsidise an internationally traded commodity to some producers but not all, the subsidised growers will be able to undercut the non-subsidised. This in turn encourages over-production and is a disincentive to agricultural improvement. Many of the farmers helped by Fairtrade are in Mexico, Argentina, and other relatively developed countries, and not in places like Ethiopia.

We recently bought oranges that we later discovered were marked ‘Fairtrade’. They came from Argentina which has a higher GDP PPP than Poland, Belgium, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland, Greece and Portugal in the top 40 richest nations. And it is blindingly obvious that oranges in European supermarkets don’t come from poor peasant farmers. They come from large commercial estates. And Fairtrade wine? Where are all this impoverished wine producers?

It doesn’t help economic development. It keeps the poor in their place, sustaining uncompetitive farmers on their land and holding back diversification, mechanization, and moves up the value chain. Just 10% of the premium consumers pay for Fairtrade actually goes to the producer. Retailers pocket the rest. It’s a racket. Fairtrade arose from the coffee crisis of the 1990s. This was not a free market failure. Governments tried to rig the market through the International Coffee Agreement and subsidized over-plantation with the encouragement of well-meaning but misguided aid agencies. The crash in prices was the inevitable result of this government intervention, but coffee prices have largely recovered since then.

However, it probably helps addle-pated numpties feel that they have done their bit to save mankind without actually exerting themselves. For ourselves, we refuse to buy anything marked ‘Fairtrade’, ‘organic’ or ‘GM free’.

O is for 'Oil' - and 'Obama'............

Yes, there is an oil boom in North Dakota causing short-term accommodation, manpower and availability of women problems. This is not from a new oilfield discovery, but from new technology focusing on enhanced recovery methods using directional drilling and fractionation.

The latter involves actually fracturing the oil-bearing formation using chemicals, but more recently steam and just plain water. I am informed that fractionation tends to separate and lift up rock formations, such as shale, and thereby allow trapped fossil fuel to flow. Directional drilling allows lateral fractionation along the producing zone and thereby eliminates the need for multiple vertical holes.

As for weaning ourselves from oil, I am of the opinion that O is attempting to do just that. He has refused permission to drill deep wells offshore and has not budged on the prospect of opening up new Alaskan fields; much to the annoyance of our political right and oil patch executives.

I am not in possession of any inside information on this subject, but the facts would support the theory that O is attempting to dramatically reduce our dependence on oil in general, and foreign oil in particular. He is promoting investment in alternative energy through spending programs and tax incentives for investors. We see almost weekly convoys of 18 wheelers under escort each carrying a single propeller blade to wind farms in West Texas. New and improved energy transfer infrastructure is under development.

If I am correct and O's efforts are motivated to better prepare America for oil scarcity, to conserve what we do have for protracted and more narrowly targeted future use and at the same time to relieve us of the growing economic burden of procuring foreign oil, then I am delighted with him. Somebody needs to do this anyway and the task becomes more difficult with each passing year.

Never mind the environmental benefits, but consider the implications of this move on US foreign policy in the Middle East.

Let the kings and emirs sell their oil to China and India and let these two countries struggle with balance of power politics and decisions of which corrupt dictator to regale and support. What we all desperately need are technical innovations, preferably in the direction of electrical energy storage and in alternative energy production cost savings.

Improved capture of solar and water and wave energy would also help. We could reduce our overall oil demand by an enormous amount tomorrow if we were to establish and enforce a 55 mph speed limit. All this and more needs to be assessed, screened and actuated in the face of screaming political oppositions.