We've been away for a two week holiday, which, with time out to get ready and more time making things ship-shape on our return, was the main reason for the long gap in posting and commenting. And, before going away there was an incident involving a dog and my right leg. This misadventure took up time unexpectedly. Thanks to A&E at the Royal Surrey the leg is now - five weeks' later - almost back to normal and hopefully the dog is wearing its new muzzle every time it goes out. It could all have been a lot worse than it was. In particular, dog-log contact time cannot have been more than about 10 seconds. I was supposed to have a 'speaking part' at church that day and my no-show triggered several kind enquiries, which bucked me up.
==================================================
The holiday was a return visit to the beautiful island of Coll in the Hebrides (previously visited and posted about almost exactly two years ago). We stayed in the same house next to the airfield. The airfield is now in use with scheduled flights twice a week and a few private planes landing and taking off while we were there - which we could watch from outside the kitchen door. We had plenty of sunny weather but rather windy with it. The main activity was visits to the superb beaches and we had opportunities to watch seals, basking sharks and an otter do their thing.
===================================================
The last time I posted I was expecting the Prime Minister's Youtube appearance to sort the allowances scandal (as it's since become). I can remember being more surprised at his choice of medium than shocked at the MPs' claims on expenses. Presumably, Gordon Brown was hoping to head off the public relations disaster that has overtaken Parliament and his government. And maybe David Cameron wouldn't play ball because he had a clearer strategy worked out for when the news broke.
Years ago I can remember someone pointing out that ninety per cent of morality was lack of opportunity; you can imagine the snigger that that remark produced in an audience. My first reaction was to think it was unduly cynical (the ninety figure is just pulled out of the ether, of course) but then you have to concede that the remark has more than a grain of truth in it.
A big part of the fix that the MPs find themselves in is that, collectively, they are responsible for failing to shut down the opportunity (that the current allowances regime allows them). As Martin Luther said, you can't stop birds flying overhead but you can stop them nesting in your hair.
That said, now we've all had an opportunity to digest the news about the MPs' claims, which were genuinely surprising, it seems that there is too much readiness to cast stones and there's a danger of a destructive mood being unleashed.
In my view the government has made the wrong call in planning to take away MPs' full responsibilityf for the future expenses regime. The MPs should be responsible for the kind of expenses system, the administration of the system and (on an individual basis) their own right use of the system and freedom of information should ensure that they fulfil all these responsibilities satisfactorily.
Overall, the government seems to have lost it since the scandal broke. There never has been a time when the government had so little to say for itself, not even in the last few months of the Major government. Then the mood that it was time for a change was well and truly harnessed by New Labour, but this time around it seems as if it's the British Constitution that's on sufferance.
The news that Nick Clegg was calling for the resignation of Alistair Darling gets close to the heart of Mr Brown's dilemma. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has coped well with the credit crunch on the whole and coping with the economic crisis is the only thing that the government has going for it at the moment. Without him, the government will probably crumble.
Apart from more revelations about how the allowances data was leaked and better insights into how the Fees Office went about its business the scandal itself has little more potential to affect the direction of change - the stones are as it were already rolling down the mountainside. It's what we already know that will decide how many 'heads will roll' and how soon a general election will be called. However, it's difficult to join up the expenses scandal with all the constitutional reforms that have been given an airing. How do the expenses relate to the abolition of the House of Lords or proportional representation? Nor does it seem like a good idea to have a referendum on something like PR at the same time as a general election; surely people need to know the voting system well before they use it.
Like most people it seems, my hope is for an autumn election.
===============================================
How come political and financial commentators have been so shocked by the 50 pence in the pound higher rate of income tax? Why do the same commentators keep on comparing it to the marginal rates of income tax that prevailed in the nineteen seventies? I remember reading an article by an elderly lady who grown up in an aristocratic household in the years before World War One (it may have been her take on the world of 'Upstairs, Downstairs' as it really was). One of her reminiscences was Papa's foul temper the day Lloyd George announced his 'People's Budget' and raised super tax to two shillings in the pound. Like Lloyd George's two shillings, Alistair Darling's 50 pence will be the thin end of the wedge and surely the commentators must have realised that more is to come. There's going to be more taxes AND spending cuts. The only alternative is runaway inflation. That's what the next government will need a mandate for and that's why the massive loss of authority on the part of the politicians is so dangerous.
=================================================
While away I spent more than the usual amount of time reading. This included George Soros's 'The Crash of 2008 '. This is both a highly interesting book and highly irritating one. The reason is that Soros has added four chapters since the Lehman Brothers stage of the crisis unfolded last autumn. He would have done better to have recast the book more radically when the extra material was added in.
That said, the main idea - that neither economists nor financiers can be objective about finance because what they say has an effect on what they're talking about - is full of possibilities and Soros is a thought provoking writer.
I'm still reading 'Rome & Jerusalem' by Martin Goodman, which as a study of the lead up to the Jewish revolt of AD 70. This is highly interesting but historians of ancient Rome have a lot of material to work on and this can make Roman history seem somewhat dense.
Finally, I enjoyed 'A blood Dimmed Tide' by Rennie Airth. Pre-war England seemed slightly over-idyllic but I'll certainly look out for the other stories in the series.
=================================================
Finally, how come the minor scandal over George Osborne and Lord Mandelson meeting Oleg Deripaska on his yacht or at his Corfu villa hasn't been gone over again now that he's involved in acquiring a share in Opel - Vauxhall?
Next time I post we'll probably be past the European elections but one good reason for treating the EU seriously is that it seems to be the only way to prevent the Russians from playing us off against each other.
