johnwvincent

Climate

It’s an odd day that I write in agreement with The Pope in Rome. He says: “People are not responding at the level of urgency that is needed” on global climate change. The Pope has a go at a commonly held blind faith in transformative ways out of our troubles by technical innovation alone. He seems to say that we ignore reality in the hope of technological magical thinking popping-up just-in-time. His references are to the need for lifestyle changes rather than carrying on regardless.

Now, quite a number on the right of political debate will see this as a lefty intervention. Anytime religious people step over the boundaries from the ethereal into everyday life the standard conservative response is to shout – get back to the pulpit. The same response, but more polite, occurs when English bishops speak up in the UK House of Lords. I’m no advocate of them being an intrinsic part of our national political systems but they do, at least, speak from an ethical grounding[1]. If we are to talk of political long-term thinking this is very much it. There’s nothing more that prompts short-term thinking than a looming election.

Combating climate change and pushing for environmental justice are not fringe activities. It requires dialogue across the main political parties. Saddly, we are going through a phase of squandering opportunities to change.

I agree that taking a puritan line and making “hairshirt” rules will not deliver the results that are needed. Most often such a sturdy approach just fuels luddite opposition and media outcry. Continuous graduated change and a robust commitment are needed. Unfortunately, these two are an anathema to the populist newspaper headline seekers.

Economic interests are often quoted as a reason to shelve changes. Yet, everyone knows that the costs ahead of us will be far bigger if change is not driven consistently – now. Resilient long-term policy isn’t a lefty luxury. Or liberal daydreaming. Or unafordable. It’s vital.

What’s interesting about active in-action is that there can be no such thing. Climate change will bite back. Action will have to be taken under presure. In civil aviation, for example the climate has an impact on aircraft operations. So, not only does aviation impact the environment but increasingly hazardous weather impacts aviation, with severe results in some cases. Turbulence experienced in-flight is increasing as the world is warming[2].

Approaching risks there are, at least, 3 positive actions to be taken. Eliminate it, reduce it, or mitigate it. With the climate emergency we’d better be committed to the first two because by the time we get to mitigation there’s likely to be few more unpalatable opportunities left.

[1] https://www.churchofengland.org/news-and-media/news-and-statements/bishops-warn-environmental-racism

[2] https://www.reading.ac.uk/news/2023/Research-News/Aviation-turbulence-strengthened-as-the-world-warmed

HS1 and a bit

John F. Kennedy made speeches that have become legendary. My favourite is: “Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You.[1]” In it he stepped up to meet the challenges of the times with clear purpose. There was no dither or wishy-washy ambiguity. The speech was a signal to the world saying: this is where we stand.

This morning, this is not the speech that I’m thinking of. I mention it because without Kennedy setting the scene in his Inaugural Address of January 1961, then his next steps would have been more difficult. There are epoch changing words. There are few modern words that match these: “We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.[2]“

In the context of the decision on the future of the HS2 railway project the words “but because they are hard” rings in my ears. In the whole saga of this national railway project did anyone say it would be easy. No one said it would be inexpensive. It was always going to be hard from the start.

If Kennedy had announced just to have a look at the Moon and return. No need to land. And he said that after a strong commitment to land on the Moon had been made, the achievement would not have changed the world. It would have been a footnote in 20^th century history because others would have made the first steps on our satellite.

In a country that gave birth to the railways you would imagine that ambition in that field of endeavour would be high. Britain had energy. Britain had innovative engineers. Britain had a technological lead. The early days of the railways fuelled the industrial revolution.

Today, we need a bold and ambitious infrastructure plan in the UK. Living off the legacy of Victorian construction has lasted longer than is wise. Tracks that were set down almost two centuries ago are still the arteries that transport people and goods throughout Britain. Where is the Isambard Kingdom Brunel[3] of the 21st century?

Now, Conservative politicians are attempting to con the country – yet again. The idiotic line that – people don’t travel by train anymore – is insulting and wrong. The thin line that we can do more with our inherited Victorian infrastructure is pitiful. The Prime Minister’s hotch-potch of projects, with no timescales given, are no alternative.

Commitments can be hard to keep. Politicians that make “firm” promises and then back track in the days before a General Election are will-o’-the-wisps. Then to claim that they are working for the long-term is newspeak. Not to be trusted. Infinity forgettable.

POST 1: Promises to upgrade main roads, that had been already anounced but delayed is not adding transport projects at all.

POST 2: HS2 explained: What is the route now, what are the costs and why is the Manchester leg being axed? | Business News | Sky News

[1] https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/inaugural-address

[2] https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/address-at-rice-university-on-the-nations-space-effort

[3] GWR was designed and built by Isambard Kingdom Brunel between 1835 and 1841 and is regarded as the most complete early railway in the world.

Button down

More as a matter of amusement than anything else, I’ll write about something that I’m entirely unqualified to raise. It’s the sartorial styles of the Conservatives as they huddle in Manchester this week. Pictures of prominent people or would be prominent people are scattered around the media and it’s impossible not to have a response. My main point of reference is the standard press shots of the MPs who have planned to stand up to speak. Standing up in public is not something to be done in one’s underwear.

Business casual hasn’t got to the Conservative Party Conference. Even business casual is now a bit of a blast from the past[1]. More suited to an industrial estate office complex in Slough than the real world. Wearing clothes that are more “modern and casual” has by-passed Manchester’s gathering of politicians. Shirts are all buttoned down.

The Conservative men’s recipe remains a strict and traditional. Even Moss Bross[2] have stepped into the 2020s. The Conservative have not. They are buttoned up and best seen against a grey background. Male politicians assembled in Manchester exhibit a dress code that is country club or what was once known as, when we had them in Britain, bank manager like. A regiment of blue ties are tightened to the neckline. Stiff collars look like they came straight out of the packet.

So much of what we see is the typecasted stereotype. No wonder a great mass of people are put off ever standing for election. It’s a good question to ask? Should British politicians look like standard politicians, and long lines of past politicians?

It’s true appearance can shape attitudes. However, my thought on the subject is that politicians shouldn’t look that much different from the population they serve. Afterall, if I turn up on your doorstep as if I was dressed to go to a funeral you might only give me the directions to the local cemetery. Strict and traditional apparel doesn’t help break down barriers. Nothing signals remoteness better than expensive dress shoes and a sharp button-down shirt.

So many years ago, it seems like another century, it was in-fact, I did do the Colour Me Beautiful training[3] at a party conference. I only have favourable memories of that brief experience. It was fun. Somewhere in a draw, I still have the colour patch that was given away as part of the course. The message is that confidence can flow from dressing in tune with who you are.

It does matter what politicians look like. I know that sounds superficial. Like it or not, what we see, as first impressions can make a huge impact on subsequent reactions. This is not a fixed phenomenon. Gradually, understated casual appearances have become the new code. Smart attire can be put together to form an individual style. More politicians should do just that.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jd68z

[2] https://www.moss.co.uk/

[3] https://www.colourmebeautiful.co.uk/training-academy

Trees 2

The story of a Sycamore has captured the imagination of a wide range of people this week.

To be frank, I’m much more a fan of the venerable Oak tree than the humble Sycamore. It’s the quintessential English tree. The Oak is the most Shakespearean of trees[1]. Even my pathetic education in English literature means I know the role played by Birnam Wood.

Again, maybe it’s my childhood. Certainly, Somerset’s farmland is peppered with old Oaks. Not as many as in the 1960s and 70s but they are still the most longstanding living organisms in the open western countryside. As far as I’m aware. Happy to be corrected on that one.

Yesterday, I wandered around under the canopy of the trees in our local park. The park has a random selection of tree species. It may have been planted with a logic. No logic is evident when wandering around. Most prolific are the Beech and Birch trees that tower, straining to reach the sunlight.

Yesterday was the last day of September. The woodland canopy’s colour is slowly changing. Leaf fall is testing the air. A few rustles underfoot and one or two falling Chestnut leaves bounce off me. Colours are mellowing. The intense green of springtime has long since faded.

I’m no wild man of the woods. To me they are more places of contemplation. It’s a contrasting atmosphere we have in our local park. I can be totally alone, except with a nod to an occasional dog walker, but only a couple hundred feet away all the noise of Saturday morning football pitches fills the air. It’s the peacefulness of a woodland cathedral with the business of life just outside its walls.

Time runs differently in woods. The rhythm of the seasons is underscored by a longer timescale. Tens of years, if not hundreds, tick away oblivious to human concerns. If left alone, a wood would make its own story of struggle, tree on tree, as the younger ones fight with their mature colleagues for space.

I did find a healthy Sycamore sapling. I felt compelled to apologies for the goings on of the week’s news. That sounds a little crazy. For a tree in the sandy soil of Surrey the fate of a distant cousin up North isn’t going to mean a lot. The point is that it made me feel better. It’s the cycle of life.

A mystical element occupies a wood[2]. There’s never a moment when our eyes and ears, sensitive to movement, are not alerted to a disturbance. However small. In our park it’s likely a squirrel. That’s no threat at all. But because our senses, however acute, can’t penetrate the depths of a wood there’s always a sense of mystery as to what’s ahead or behind.

[1] https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/into-the-woods-with-shakespeare

[2] https://www.thedavidhockneyfoundation.org/chronology/2008

Trees

Out of the window of my boyhood bedroom there was a line of huge Elms. So much did they dominate the landscape that what was beyond was thrown into the shadows. They were more part of the skyscape as they raised their branches to touch the clouds.

I wondered at the massive trunks of these trees. They were the Californian Redwoods of my childhood Somerset. Tall and straight, their bark was grey and smooth. These towering Elms stood bolt upright against any weather. Season after season they were the predominant landmark. Sadly, it’s a disease that brought an end to these tall living monoliths. Now, they exist only in a few black and white pictures and the memories of people like me.

Trees play a bigger part in our lives than we ever acknowledge. It’s often when they have gone that we miss them the most. As the words of the song goes: “you don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone.” Capturing the melancholy remorse of loss, words can’t replace the impact of these living leviathans. Visually stunning their image is lost but not forgotten.

Today, on the same country road where these Elms grew directions are often given to “turn right at the bendy tree”. In this case referring to an out of place Fir tree on a marshy riverbank. What’s common is its success in shooting towards the sun. Looking dishevelled and leaning one way, this lone Fir tree is a perfect navigation aid.

This week’s story about the Sycamore Gap[1] has resonance for me. I’m not alone in that feeling. One tree has captured the national news. The words I have for those who brought a chainsaw to this beauty are not repeatable[2]. More mildly I’d say: moronic vandals who must have brains the size of tiny walnuts, if they have any brains at all.

Sane people can’t for one single moment understand why a prat, or prats did this cruel act. Sadly, vandalism is all around us, but this takes the biscuit. Surely even amongst complete and utter idiots there remains some sense of what’s beyond the pale[3].

Village stocks were made of wood[4]. They still are, where they still stand. A good punishment for the perpetrators of this crime would be that stocks are erected on the site. The villains must spend a winter in the gap. I’ll be kind and suggest that they not be held there for 300-years. Naturally, the stocks should be made of sycamore wood.

[1] https://news.sky.com/story/sycamore-gap-tree-second-person-arrested-in-connection-with-felling-of-iconic-landmark-12972772

[2] https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sycamore-gap-tree-northumberland-live-27801497

[3] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/beyond-the-pale

[4] https://www.propfactory.co.uk/listing/item/GGG009.html

Adaptation

There was a time when AI was an esoteric subject that filled the minds of high-minded professors. They had real trouble trying to translate what they were doing into langauage that most of us would understand. Research in the subject area was the purview of national institutes and military facilities. Results flowed into academic journals and little read folders in the corners of university libraries.

That has changed. What was expensive to build and test because everything was unique or bespoke is no longer. Enough is known about algorithms that work, and the ones that don’t, to make practical experimentation much more viable. AI tools are turning up on our desktops, tablets, and phones without us even asking. Opting-in is often assumed.

A massive number of applications are nothing more than fizz. They can be useful, but they are not game changers, and our lives carry on much as before. What is new, or at least pushing at the door, is applications that control things in our everyday environment.

If traffic lights start guessing what my age is before allocating a maximum time to cross the road, we are going to start to see a good amount of pavement rage when they get it wrong. When AI algorithms drive my car for me it’s going to be a bad day when accidents start to accumulate[1] (even if the total system of systems is far safer than us mere humans). Anyway, it’s easy to write scary stuff about AI. In this case I’d like to highlight some positive gains that might be realised.

A lot of what is designed, produced, and sold is pretty much fixed the day it leaves the shop or showroom. Yes, for example, cars are recalled for fixing known deficiencies but the threshold for taking such action is extremely high. Even in a safe industry like civil aviation dealing with an unsafe condition that has been discovered takes time and a great deal of resources.

AI has the potential to be adaptive[2]. So, that thing that you buy, car, washing machine, or whatever, will have the inbuild ability to learn. To adapt to its situation. To be like others of its type but, over time, to customise itself to the needs of its user.

Just image a domestic appliance that can adapt to its pattern of use. Always staying with safe boundaries, producing maximum energy efficiency, and doing its job to the best of its specification. Let’s imagine a car that gets to know common routes and all the hazards on those routes and even takes the weather and time of day into account when driving those routes.

In all that adaptive potential there’s great benefit. Unlike buying gloves that are made to specific standard sizes and don’t quite fit you, the adaptive glove would be that malleable leather that slowly gets a better and better fit with use. AI will be able to do that if it gathers the right kind of data.

Now naturally, this gets complicated if the adaptive element is also safety related. The control system in a car, truck, tram, train, or aircraft must get it right day after day in a wide range of conditions. Nevertheless, if systems are constrained within known safe boundaries there’s much to be gained by adaptation. This is not taking control away from the human in the loop but making it easier to do what humans do best. Just a thought.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/28/tesla-trial-autopilot-crash/

[2] https://luffy.ai/pages/IS-DR.html

Showboating

Thinking that the pressure of global migration will go away if we build a high enough wall, physically or legally, is foolish and doesn’t work.

We have a Minister called Braveman in the UK. Currently the Home Secretary. She has a particular set of views which can accurately be described as of the right of politics. Given recent speeches it may be more accurate to say that she holds views that are of those of far-right political parties.

At a time when the UK Home Office is performing badly, she chooses to spend her time in ways that contribute little to solving problems. Her diagnosis is flawed. At the same time her desire to parade in front of cameras is insatiable. Upstaging her colleagues and showboating are roles that she plays with apparent ease. All this while the Home Office flounders.

In part Braveman’s flawed thinking comes from an overly legalistic grandstanding[1]. Yes, UK Members of Parliament are legislators, but Government Ministers should be leaders and administrators too. The UK Home Office’s challenges can not be addressed by law making alone, or even grandstanding about law making. Fine, policy can be important. In the current predicament timely action and implementation are far more important.

Building walls, forging barriers, imprisoning immigrants are appealing options to hard core isolationism, nationalists, and xenophobes. A long history of experience shows that their impacts are temporary, at best, and the worst extremes are soon entertained. North Korea has policies of that nature. History records the devastation caused by aggressive nationalists’ policies in the 1930s.

Saying that words written in the 1950s are no more relevant is a puny argument. She does not say that the Magna Carta is irrelevant or that the US Constitution is out of date. Braveman picks and chooses likes and dislikes to fit her nasty narrative[2].

At home, the cartoon of the ostrich with its head in the sand applies. Thinking that the pressure of global migration will go away if we build a high enough wall, physically or legally, is foolish and doesn’t work. Demonising those who are in peril is downright criminal.

Yes, immigration must be regulated. National borders must be controlled. A nations administration must be well managed. All of these are vital areas where immediate focus is needed. All of these seem to be ignored by Braveman.

Posturing in front of media hungry think tanks is futile. It’s for show. It’s a Trump like approach to the UK’s challenges and will bring only continued failure. Braveman has ambitions to be a party leader. That frightening prospect hangs in the air like a bad smell. Now, her unfortunate colleagues struggle and fidget when trying to defend her showboating. Let’s hope her time in office is short.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66930930

[2] https://news.sky.com/story/suella-braverman-hits-back-at-sir-elton-john-criticism-of-speech-as-she-brushes-off-claims-she-is-aiming-for-tory-leadership-12971087

HS2 – again

Travelled on the Elizabeth Line yesterday. It was an expensive project to build. Tunnelling under London and erecting new stations was a costly business. It was called “Crossrail”. Approval was given in 2007 and construction started in 2009[1]. In 2022, one-sixth of the UK’s total rail journeys took place on the Elizabeth Line. The billions spent were a major investment in the future. Over £18 billion in fact. It was a national demonstration that huge civil engineering projects can be undertaken and mastered[2].

As a passenger the Elizabeth Line is a pleasure to use. It’s clean, speedy, and simple to use. Comparing it to the older London Tube lines is like comparing a Tesla with a Ford Anglia[3]. Sadly, a great deal of our national rail infrastructure is trapped in the Ford Anglia era.

So, what of HS2[4]? The wibbling and wobbling that has plagued the project is sucking the energy out of the resolve needed to see through an even bigger undertaking than Crossrail. Some people argue that the billions needed for HS2 could be better spent on other projects. However, the portfolio of transport projects that are suggested as alternatives never seem to materialise.

Talk of cancellations feed the political turbulence over infrastructure investments. The impression this presents goes way beyond the shores of this country. There’s no Global Britain on show here. It’s more signals of dither and lack of determination that are publicly on display. Instability and the short-term outlook is the motif of the current generation of politicians.

If there are superior and smarter alternatives to HS2 they should have come up during the planning phase of the project. What we know about vast engineering projects is that chopping and changing them midstream adds massively to costs. It also diminishes the usefulness of the outcome.

Britain needs a backbone. A rail backbone and a political backbone. The spending on HS2 is large but that spending is in country. It’s jobs and investment onshore for the benefit of the whole country, not just the Southeast of England.

The last few years have seen that banner “levelling up” heralded by Conservative politicians. This slogan will be as nothing if HS2 is wound down or constricted. The signal will be loudly heard that all that talk of levelling up the regions of Britain was shadow boxing.

In the long-term improved connectivity across the country will be a great asset. The Victorians knew a thing or two about engineering great projects. Their legacy should give us resolve.

POST: Still it is good to see the rest of the world getting on with High Speed Rail High-speed Archives – International Railway Journal (railjournal.com)

[1] https://www.timeout.com/london/news/the-new-elizabeth-line-your-crossrail-questions-answered-052322

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/13/elizabeth-line-crossrail-opening-london

[3] https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/ford/104979/ford-anglia-105e-and-123e-buying-guide-and-review-1959-1968

[4] https://www.hs2.org.uk/

Get Back

The big picture story is that Europe needs unity more and more to face the future.

Today, a National Rejoin March takes place in London. This march takes place when it’s all to evident that Brexit has been an abject failure. Having the bravery to admit that Brexit is a failure remains challenging. UK political leaders are shying away from admitting the reality of our common situation.

Thousands of those who support the UK being a European Union (EU) member are gathering in the capital. It’s time to ensure a message gets sent that re-joining the EU is a popular and gaining momentum. Members of Parliament (MPs) may not be in Parliament on the weekend, but the message sent by those on the city’s streets is strong and clear.

It’s true that this is a frustrating experience. I’ve been on many organised London marches. They are characterised by their camaraderie, positivity, and great spirit. Marching makes a difference to the people who march and it’s also makes a wider impact. Media coverage may be sparce. What they do see and hear is a sense of solidarity and unity.

Sadly, there are no apparent results flowing from this national campaign, so far. The UK’s out of touch political parties are trying to look the other way. Today, the fearful nature of the bland mixture of our political leaders is immensely disappointing. They scurry around like little brown rats. Looking busy but terrified of stepping outside their comfort zone.

Tinkering with the Trade and Cooperation Agreement signed by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson will deliver only more disappointment. Papering over that public disappointment, we can rely on a part of the tabloid media spinning threatening stories. The artificial culture wars raging between the political right and left have little to do with reality. This noisy nonsense plunders the opportunity to make life better for the vast majority. It’s a side show.

The big picture story is that Europe needs unity more and more to face the future. If it’s climate change, war, immigration, or economic troubles sustainable solutions cannot be found in isolation. Our region of the world is so interconnected and interdependent that events in one part of Europe inevitably affect others. Brexit does not work.

Future generations will look back on this era as being a regressive one. Opportunities lost and difficulties increased by a lack of political bravery. A lack of direction. A lack of leadership. This will be overcome in time, but that change will not come soon enough.

POST: Reporting on the event Pro-EU supporters march for Britain to rejoin the European Union (france24.com)

Views

Journalists do a vital job. See, I’ve said it. It’s true. Now, I get on to the “but”. Afterall, what’s the point in writing unless there’s a point to make. I’m talking about the factual reporting rather than the more fanciful material.

I notice this frequently. It’s on the radio, its in the newspapers, it’s on TV. Basically, we have more and more journalists talking to journalists, particularly in the political domain. My purely subjective impression is not science, even if I’m sure it could be backed up by numbers.

Commentary is good and good commentary is even better. Understanding the complexities of our mixed-up multifaceted society needs some help. There’s always the difficulty of having so much information that none of us can see the wood for the trees. Careful and thoughtful analysis helps.

So, I’m not having a downer on journalists. It’s just, I get annoyed when there’s a parade of interviews that are nothing more than journalists asking other journalists questions. There’s that image of a snake eating its tail. The more that News comes from one place, to be analysed by one group of people and then to be scrutinised by the same, the more the mouth and the tail met.

When I’m in the car, soaking up time in a traffic jam on the M25, I listen to LBC[1]. Although this radio station has its interminable monologues from its presenters, at least the phone in format means that some of the public get aired. However, cranky, and unfathomable their views it’s always good to hear what people have to say.

I’ve been doing some doorstepping. Canvasing people. It’s a great way to get to know what people are thinking. Not everyone wants to talk. That aside, there’s always plenty that do. From that experience a fascinating range of opinions comes to the fore. A swirling range of views.

Don’t get the wrong impression. Not everyone is seething with anger about the state of the world. A few are that’s for sure. There’s still plenty of hopeful folk who are engaged in their communities constantly trying to make the best of things. Knowing a little of the good and bad of a community’s experiences is a great insight. It’s far more interesting than pitching one media columnist against another.

Perhaps the format of the BBC’s Question Time[2] ought to be completely changed. Have an audience full of journalists and politicians and a panel made up of the public. There could be a postcode lottery to pick members of the public to sit on the panel.

It’s might not be easy to put together. It’s said public speaking is a top fear of most people. Finding people who would take up the offer who would genuinely embrace it and not go too much off the wall, would be challenging. I’m not calling for a revival of what Jerry Springer was famed for.

[1] https://www.lbc.co.uk/

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001qxgz