Category: Economy

What do you think?

A bill poster looked down at me. In big bold letters the word “Good” was the main message. It was the fact that a local college had been graded as good. They clearly wanted everyone to know that an inspection had gone well. Afterall, the rent of street posters is not cheap.

So, for all the efforts of all the staff, and the whole educational institution their work was summed up in one simple word. Four colourful letters displayed to passers-by. To be categorised as “Good” is read as having crossed a line. It’s a positive statement and a long way from – fail. Equally, it’s a mile off – excellent. The trouble is that “Good” is such a bland word. We have such a wide spectrum of use for that word that it’s difficult to know what it means.

One wonderful comedy sketch is that of Statler and Waldorf in the Muppets[1]. The two argumentative elderly men master the art of heckling. They start by saying: “that was wonderful” and then “it really wasn’t that good”, then keep on going until they get to “that was terrible” before they sign off.

It’s a nice reminder of a range of opinions being like shifting sand. In the range of one to ten the word “Good” is smack bang in the middle. Probably the most inoffensive classification.

If you are like me, you will have experienced a stream of e-mails asking for an opinion. Surveys are the number one marketing tool. To lure us they often have prize draws or the prospect of a giveaway.

“As a valued customer we welcome your feedback”. “We wondered if you could spare 5 – 6 minutes?” In theory, the fact that a business is interested in feedback is a positive. I like to know that a restaurant or airline is taking customer feedback. The hope is that feedback assists businesses in improving and developing their services.

However, an invitation to “share your thoughts” is reduced to box ticking. It’s almost as if we are still in the world of computers run on punched cards. These electronic surveys are constructed for the processor rather than that of the user.

They are quite checky too. Tick a particular box on a survey and another one comes up to ask – why do you feel that way? It’s almost as if you are required to justify a freely given opinion and threatened with being ignored if you don’t.

For all the above customer surveys have been a part of the landscape for since the early days of the internet. Categorisations put a stamp on what we think. It’s crude. Sometimes it’s merely a set of five stars with a request to choose one. Cantankerous opinions are mixed with indifferent answers. The aggregation of a pile of data can make the results as bland as tasteless soup. This can then be pasted into company reports. Thus becoming more of a security blanket rather than real feedback.

Let’s end on a positive note. This is a subject where Artificial Intelligence (AI) can contribute. Instead of box ticking why not have a dialogue with customers. Ask them what they really think. Imagine an animated AI version of Statler and Waldorf. Now, that would be fun.

[1] https://youtu.be/NpYEJx7PkWE

Swing

The results are in. They are exceptional in the true sense of the word. The Labour Party pushed aside two large Conservative Party majorities[1]. The momentum for change is gathering pace. It’s not slowing. Those motivated to go out and vote on Thursday sent a strong message.

The Labour Party candidate was victorious in Mid Bedfordshire despite all three major British political parties putting up a fight. Only a tiny minority are going to miss the former Conservative MP Nadine Dorries. At least for the next year, or so the constituents of Mid Bedfordshire will have some form of representation in Parliament.

Overturning massive electoral majorities doesn’t happen every day. The Conservatives were sitting on a majority of more than 24,000 and now it’s all gone. It’s true that the voter turnout in a byelection doesn’t match that of a UK General Election but in the face of such a massive swing this is immaterial. Even making the case that defending parties are often on the back foot doesn’t make much difference.

Having been on the doorstep in Mid Bedfordshire my impression is that the mood was for change. Immediate change. The electorate is smart when it comes to making choices. In this case they have chosen those they perceive as most likely to deliver what they want.

Commentators have described this as a “political earthquake” for the Conservatives. The references to May 1997 are flooding out of media outlets. How can they not? Similar percussors were evident in the years leading up to Tony Blair’s victory over the then Conservative Prime Minister John Major. 

Are we heading for a UK General Election in 2024 that mimics the results of May 1997? A simple reading of public opinion does point in that direction, at the moment.

With a year to go, and all that may bring, it would be hubris to assume that a General Election result can be predicted. In 1964, Labour politician Harold Wilson famously said: a week is a long time in politics. That’s as true now as it ever was. In fact, volatility is a mark of our age.

Despite the wisdom of caution, with the legacy that the Conservatives have accumulated, it would be remarkable in the absolute extreme if they did engineer a sustained recovery in the next year.  

It’s an American saying, and with some argument over its attribution – politicians, like diapers, should be changed regularly. The meaning is clear. There are times when change is the imperative. The exact nature of the change is not as important as the fact that change takes place.

That’s where we are. There’s a hunger to put the dreadful political mess of the last decade behind us. To aim for higher goals. To look ahead with ambition and optimism.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-67126173

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 20th 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.

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)

Get Back

It’s painful to watch. Frightening. Seeing them take over London. Yes, I did hide behind the sofa when the Cybermen[1] came on. But then again, I was only around 6 or 7-years old. They converted humans to their kind by removing emotions and personalities. Scary stuff. The sort of evil creatures that nightmares are made of. With bodies made of cybernetic parts they seemed undefeatable but like so many great science fiction stories they had weaknesses, and the Doctor knew them. My early Dr Who knew exactly what to do.

In this case it’s not fiction that I’m writing about. Just the same it was painful to watch. Frightening. Seeing them take over London and the whole country. We had years of this scary drama. In fact, its still going on around us now. Laura Kuenssberg’s State of Chaos[2] has been a true horror story. This week I caught the Part 2. I don’t think I can take another Part.

History is being penned quickly in our media age. Watching the story of how our political system was smashed-up by a bunch of marauding, well, I don’t know what to call them. Is there a collective term for careless, egotistic, idiotic, manic, obsessive, power-hungry politicians? A term one can use in polite company, that is.

Since 2016, and to a lesser degree just before, the march of Conservative politicians has been to the tune with a dangerous beat. Smash-up the norms, disregard sound advice and steam ahead with blind arrogance. Much of this is epitomised by the character of Boris Johnson, but there are so many other in the cast strange and obsessive people.

Kuenssberg must tread a fine line because getting caught up in the finger pointing polarisation of the politicians is perilous. In her time as BBC Political Editor, it must have been like walking across Niagara on a tightrope every day.

The State of Chaos is giving us a new perspective on the Conservative Party’s on-going civil war. It seems the situation was even worse than we had been led to believe. This documentary is a treasure-trove of extraordinary material that is only a sample of what happened.

I’d say we all agree. It doesn’t matter which side of the Brexit argument that you stand or stood. Utter chaos has transpired in the reign of the last 5 Conservative Prime Ministers. Interviewees can point fingers at each other, all the same the word chaos applies.

In the coming months the lessons from this fearful period need to be learned. A new normal need to be established. We need to get back[3] what we have lost. Get back a sense of responsibility. Get back a reputation for competence. Get back ambition for the future.

[1] Dr Who. The Cybermen first appear in the serial The Tenth Planet in 1966, set in 1986.

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m001qgww/laura-kuenssberg-state-of-chaos

[3] I must be channelling The Beatles.

Upfront

Years of looking at the reliability of aircraft components and structure have given engineers a good understanding of the natural decay of mechanical workings. To that extent even electronic components are mechanical. Materials oxidise (rust), random shocks and vibration take their toll, temperatures cycles from cold to hot and back again a whole range of impacts are relentless. You can say – nothing lasts forever.

Occasionally a discovery adds to the knowledge of how materials behave under high stress. Sadly, that’s what hit the early years of civil jet aviation. The de Havilland DH106 “Comet” was the world’s first passenger carrying jet airliner. It first took to the air in 1949, which I find remarkable.

Catastrophic metal fatigue failure of the aircraft fuselage put paid to this British aviation project but only after several tragic fatal accidents. In 1954, the Comet aircraft were all grounded during an extensive accident investigation. The jets were redesigned and re-entered commercial service in 1958. However, by then the aircraft had a damaged reputation and others were doing far better. Now, those Comet aircraft that remain are museum exhibits[1].

Last week, I walked through the fuselage of a Comet 1A built in 1953 at Hatfield for Air France. It’s fascinating to see what advanced aviation technology was 70-years ago. What was surprising to me was the read across from that first version of a jet aircraft and what we have in-service now.

Automation has removed the place of the navigator and the flight engineer, but the stations of the pilot and co-pilot are familiar. The fuselage is cramped but the seating is generous and spacious. This aircraft must have been a dramatic revolution in flying at the time.

As we look to advance aviation in the coming years, with new ways of flying and new ways of powering flight so the warning of the Comet project should be heeded. We are at a time of extraordinary changes in the aviation industry. Advanced technology can deliver great benefits to society. It’s up to us to make sure we cover all the possible disbenefits as far upfront as we can. If we don’t, they will come back to bite us.

[1] https://www.dehavillandmuseum.co.uk/aircraft/de-havilland-dh106-comet-1a/

Newspeak

Listening to the drivel coming from The Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP[1] this morning on the radio reminds me that we have a long way to go. The road travelled is a long one.

The tendency to either speak like a badly typed up press release or repeatedly call apples – pears is astonishing. It must be that there’s a switch that has been thrown in the brains of Ministers that is hit to engage illogical nonsense. From that moment a droning sound emanates. Jumbled up words are contrived to say Brexit = good – not Brexit = bad. You would imagine that such Ministers think they are talking to naughty 5-year-olds. It doesn’t mater what the facts are this behaviour continues.

Even good news, like BMW’s continued investment in the UK, is flipped into an EU bashing session. The fact is that the UK had to demonstrate its willingness to support the car industry to retain that much needed investment.

Brexit has been, and is, a complete catastrophe, and everyone knows it. That is everyone who isn’t a Conservative Minister, or a Labour would be Minister. Badenoch plays childish games to paint a picture of great success when the reality is one of significant pressure.

The Foreign Direct Investment Statistics are not good[2]. To quote a recent report to Parliament: “Net investment from the EU was -£24.1 billion, compared to £28.0 billion in 2020, while net investment from Europe as a whole was -£27.6 billion “. Note the “-“, in other words negative.

To quote further:” The UK’s share of inward investment projects has stabilised after “falling sharply following the 2016 vote for Brexit”, with the 21% of projects attracted in 2015 “representing the high-water mark.” In other words, the UK was doing exceptionally well until Brexit came along.

And so much for so called – levelling up. London retained its status as the UK’s largest destination for inward investment projects. London continues to attract the world’s attention.

What’s further idiocy is the random pick and mix approach that this Conservative Government has adopted. There appears to be no strategy. No direction. Just an opportunism. Jump in a wholly reactive manner and then announce success, as if it was planned.

Looking at investment going the other way. The UK’s outward investment flows to the US reached their highest level since 2017. So, post-Brexit, British investors see opportunity in the US. Could it be because they are investing? The US Infrastructure Law targets a range of spending from repaving roads and water system upgrades.

With the News, such as it is, surely, we need a UK Infrastructure Law. Would British investors not want to support that idea?

POST 1: Badenoch would not face the reality. On Sky News she skirted around the subject but let slip that cars will be more expensive in the UK because of Brexit. Rules of origin impact the British car industry.

POST 2: For the sake of balance. At least Badenoch is taking a practical approach to China. The Conservative back benchers who push for a hard line are not thinking about the need for dialogue on climate change and trade. Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament China (independent.gov.uk)

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/people/kemi-badenoch

[2] https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8534/CBP-8534.pdf

Horizon

There’s been a couple of false dawns. Now, the morning’s News is that the UK will rejoin the European Horizon programme. The EU’s Horizon Europe Framework Programme (HORIZON) provides grant funding for research priority topics for the years 2021-2027.

The recognition that there’s a common interest in research across Europe is welcome. There are important areas of investigation that go well beyond the resources available to any one country. Benefiting from collaboration is a win-win.

Access to Horizon Europe will be a great opportunity for UK aerospace[1]. It has been in the past and surly will be in the future. Of the billions available there’s a good chunk for funding opportunities for aerospace research and technology. This funding is particularly focused on greening aviation.

Such subjects as the competitiveness and digital transformation in aviation are addressed too. Advancing the regions capabilities in a digital approach to aerospace design, development and manufacturing will be invaluable to UK industry. Artificial Intelligence (AI) used for Machine Learning (ML) and complex modelling are the tools that will be deployed throughout the global industrial environment.

Europe can pioneer the first hydrogen-powered commercial aircraft. The major role the UK can play in advancing this aim is self-evident. Ambition, capabilities, and expertise reside here. The magnification of this to tackle what are enormous challenges can only be a good move.

Projects like ENABLEH2[2] provide a pathway to the introduction of liquid H2 for civil aviation. These projects are not easy, but they do provide a long-term environmental and sustainability advantages. Access to these projects can minimise duplication and the dangers of spending valuable resources on pursuing blind alleys.

Research is not just a matter of hard technology. Without the new skills that are required to meet the targets for a green transition it will fail. Investments in upskilling and reskilling opportunities are equally important to enabling change.

The principles of propulsion of hydrogen and electric systems need to be taught at every level. It’s not academics in lab coats that will keep civil aviation flying on a day-by-day basis. Training programmes for a new generation of manufacturing and maintenance engineers will need to be put in place. Research will underpin that work. 

[1] https://www.ati.org.uk/news/access-to-horizon-europe/

[2] https://www.enableh2.eu/