Bad Law

Jacob Rees-Mogg resigned on St Crispin’s Day. Shakespeare’s imagination of glory and immortality in Henry V no doubt on his strange mind. Well, let’s say we are not outnumbered by the French. We are outnumbered by the ideology of persistent right-wing Parliamentarians.

The bill in Mogg’s name got a reading in the UK Parliament last night. The so called Orwellian “Brexit Freedoms Bill” would make any authoritarian Government in the world simile.

This is a dreadful bill. To imagine British legislators are so superior that they can replace, fairly, effectively and honestly, so much complex law in so short a time is a simple con. Much of the legislative texts facing replacement took decades of research, investigation and proving to take shape. A great many of these laws of EU origin were driven by the UK.

Ministers attempting to claim to the UK Parliament that the EU retained law bill will allow ambitious standards to be maintained sounds like the worst sales pitch of a second-hand car salesman. Consumer, employment, and environmental regulation is not a burden. It’s an asset. Widespread outcry is justified[1]. #AttackOnNature

Duplications is a serious concern too. For organisations trading with the EU and beyond, having to met two sets of different laws will add considerable additional costs.

This bill would tie-up civil servants for a long-time and oversight of what happens wouldn’t be of the quality needed.

The former Business Secretaries were driven by Brexit dogma. The new Business Secretary needs to stop and think again. There’s no profit in trashing what works.

A serious debate about individual laws is the job of Parliament. Sweeping away swaths of good law because it’s a prejudice of the secretive European Research Group (ERG)[2] is sheer madness. Parliamentarians should work for the people, not against their interests.

POST 1: Financial Times: UK’s Rishi Sunak eases off on taking Brexit axe to EU laws. Plan for ‘delivery unit’ shelved in wake of warning EU legislation review would tie up hundreds of officials.

POST 2: Mogg continues to promote his “bonfire” of EU law retained after Brexit in The Express newspaper.

POST 3: Brexit supporters are coming out against this bad law Rees-Mogg’s plans to axe all EU laws will cripple Whitehall, says leading Brexiter | Law | The Guardian


[1] https://www.rspb.org.uk/our-work/rspb-news/rspb-news-stories/attack-on-nature-the-story-so-far/?from=hp2

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Research_Group

Last Chance

Dining at the last chance saloon, Rishi Sunak calls for unity. The man who will become Conservative Prime Minister (PM) has his work cut out. It’s one thing to point towards the 2019 General Election as the basis of the legitimacy of this coming Government but we now know, beyond a doubt, that the manifesto of that time was no more than a con. A majority in Parliament has been shown to not be enough alone to get things done.

Marketing Richi Sunak[1] as a knight in shining armour in troubled times may sing with Members of Parliament (MPs). Boris Johnson’s former supporters will just sit on their hands and steam.

So, has his selection stopped the Conservative Party imploding? I think not. 

For one, how will it be possible to construct a credible cabinet when the choices are limited to the people who have been less than capable, loyal, or reliable?

Two, the country’s Conservative party members have been kicked in the teeth. Having spent the summer consulting them, their opinions and votes have now been put in the dustbin.

Three, if we are we on the way to austerity Mk2 the Government’s popularity will further sink like a stone. Yet, financial stability will only be achieved by reversing the errors of recent times.

Four, the intemperate language of the Brexiters continues as they interpret every set back as a Socialists/Remainer plot and call most Conservative MPs “wets”[2]. In other words; weak and ineffective and against their beloved project.

Five, the public have been bystanders in all this poltical nonsense. They are shrugging their shoulders in dismay watching the antics of their MPs. This cannot be erased by just shuffling the cards.

It may be time for a little calm. A moment of calm will be good for everyone. Behind the curtains in that last chance saloon the panic will take a week or so to get going. Unity is a mysterious beast. People can desire it all they like but if the basic conditions are not in place, it will be illusive.


[1] https://twitter.com/schrankartoons/status/1584658993838002177?s=20&t=Z053gFJk1s45cdwrg7KQJg

[2] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/authors/n/nf-nj/nile-gardiner/

Air Taxi 3

Urban mobility by air, had a flurry of success in the 1970s. However, it did not end well.

Canadian Joni Mitchell is one of the most celebrated singer-songwriters and my favourite. She has tapped into the social and environmental issues that have concerned a lot of us for decades. Of her large catalogue, I can’t tell you how much I love this song[1]. The shear beauty of the lyric.

Anyway, it’s another track on the album called “Hejira” that I want to refer. When I looked it up, I found out, I was wrong. The song I want to refer to is on the 1975 album “The Hissing of Summer Lawns”. The song “Harry’s House[2]” contains the line “a helicopter lands on the Pan Am roof like a dragon fly on a tomb.” Without going into what it’s all about, the lyrical image is that flying from a city skyscraper roof was seen as glamorous and the pinnacle of success.

In 1970, prominent aviation authorities were talking about the regulatory criteria needed for the city-centre VTOL[3] aircraft of the future. Then on the afternoon of 16 May 1977, New York Airways Flight 971, a Sikorsky S-61 helicopter, crashed[4] on Pan Am’s building rooftop heliport[5]. That ghastly fatal accident reset thinking about city centre operations air transport operations.

So, what’s different 50-year on? Proposals for city centre eVTOL operations are much in the News. City planners are imagining how they integrate an airborne dimension into public transport operations. Cars, busses, trains and eVTOL aircraft may all be connected in new multimodal terminals. That’s the city transport planners’ vision for less than a decade ahead.

For one, the vehicles are radically different. Yes, the physics of flight will not change but getting airborne is quite different between a conventional large helicopter and the plethora of different eVTOL developments that are underway across the world.

Another point, and that’s why I’m writing this piece, is the shear amount of safety data that can be made available to aircraft operators. Whereas in the 1970s, a 5-parameter flight recorder was thought to be neat, now the number of digital parameters that could be collected weighs in over thousands. In the 1970s, large helicopters didn’t even have the basic recording of minimal flight data as a consideration. The complexity in the future of eVTOL will be, not how or where to get data but what to do with all the data that is streamed off the new aircraft.

Interestingly, this changes the shape of the Heinrich and Bird “safety pyramid” model[6]. Even knowing about such a safety model is a bit nerdy. That said, it’s cited by specialist in countless aviation safety presentations.

Top level events, that’s the peak of the pyramid, remain the same, but the base of the pyramid becomes much larger. The amount of safety data that could be available on operational occurrences grows dramatically. Or at least it should.

POST: Growing consideration is being given to the eVTOL ecosystem. This will mean a growing need to share data Advanced Air Mobility Portal (nasa.gov)


[1] https://youtu.be/nyj5Be5ovas

[2] A nice cover https://youtu.be/bjvYgpm–tY

[3] VTOL = Vertical Take Off and Landing.

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/1977/05/17/archives/5-killed-as-copter-on-pan-am-building-throws-rotor-blade-one-victim.html

[5] https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/16-may-1977/

[6] https://skybrary.aero/articles/heinrich-pyramid

Our political class is sclerotic

It’s been pointed out time and time again. It’s not like it’s a new phenomenon. The education of our politicians is dominated by a small number of schools, universities, and courses. Having an Oxford PPE[1] puts someone in pole position. So, does attendance at Eton.

Yes, we are not the only society to exhibit such educational polarisation, but it’s deep rooted in the UK. Centuries of domination of select institutions are well documented. The UK is long in the tooth. One set of privileged people are often in the wings to replace another set of similar people.

Simple generalisations about this fact being bad are not so easy to sustain. On the list of those who were educated in this way have been some real reformers and progressive thinkers. Nevertheless, there are a significant number of dangers that come from such a narrow streaming.

Although the overarching heading of Philosophy, Politics and Economics contains a variety of options and differences, it’s been constructed as a machine in a factory for politicians. It’s a cooky cutter for a template Member of Parliament (MP). For a long, long time, local constituency party’s and a significant number of voters have taken it as read that this is the model for an MP.

An interesting question arises in the current chaotic political maelstrom. Is this phenomenon one of the roots of periodic failures and catastrophes in the UK?

Here’s several reasons why the suggestion can not be easily dismissed.

Narrow streaming is a great way to instil a “group think” in our governance. Thing is, I don’t think we (voters) need or want this to happen. The risks are self-evident. There’s a greater propensity to agreement on the wrong course of action. An example is the decision to go to war in Iraqi.

Linking “orthodoxy” and stability in the minds of the population may limit what can be done. This is a strange one in that politicians with a common background can be strongly motivated to be unconventional just for the sake of doing it. Maybe that’s what has just happened.

Diversity is not just a nice to have. Diversity brings strengths that are not available in a monoculture. It’s a good strategy to bring in new ideas. New thinking. Bring in people with a wide variety of different backgrounds and experiences.

Change is needed. The UK’s political class is sclerotic. It shouldn’t be a surprise that we just had a national heart attack.


[1] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/23/ppe-oxford-university-degree-that-rules-britain

Talent

This coming week an international tradeshow takes place in London. It’s easier to get to than it’s ever been, at least for me. The wonderful new Elizabeth line[1] goes directly to the ExCeL London.

The organisers describe the event as for the commercial aviation aftermarket. Personally, I don’t like those terms, but I guess it’s a way of grouping together all the activities that happen after an aircraft has been delivered by an airframe manufacturer. That’s maintenance, repair, overhaul and a good deal of other activities. It might be sophisticated test equipment or spanners. It might be hanger facilities or complete aero engine overhauls.

MRO Europe[2] is a major European event. Along with the exhibition there’s a conference highlighting some of the challenges aviation faces. There are a whole lot of uncertainties that are rippling through the industry. Recovery from the impact of the COVID pandemic is happening but it has taken its toll. 

The conference subject that caught my eye is that concerning the shortage of qualified people. Civil aviation must compete with every other international technology-based industry. Long gone are the days of the 1960s and 70s when aviation was associated with glamour and a kind of post-war kudos. Now, those with the right abilities, attitude and experience can command excellent reward packages in a wide variety of digital high-tech industries.

The MRO industry is aging. Offering an attractive pathway to young people is proving to be difficult. It’s a two-sided problem. On the one side the industry is inherently conservative. Afterall it’s in the safety business where reputation for quality matters. On the other side the attitudes, beliefs and expectations of younger people are markedly different from those of their potential mentors and teachers. Bridging this divide isn’t easy.

Apprenticeship schemes do help[3]. However, they are often picking up the people who already know they want a career in aviation.

The challenge is not just recruitment but retention. The aviation industry must make it attractive to retain talent. Working in an aircraft hanger, or on the ramp in the middle of a cold winter isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. Especially when comparing stories with a colleague in a nice warm office of a telecoms or social media company.

Building community, professionalism and a love of aviation is a priority. I’ve seen this done in the US. Next April at MRO Americas at the Georgia World Congress Center in Atlanta a competition[4] takes place. It’s an excellent example of how to create excitement in this field. Check it out.


[1] https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/elizabeth-line/

[2] https://mroeurope.aviationweek.com/en/home.html

[3] https://www.stsaviationgroup.com/sts-aviation-services-launches-newly-formed-apprenticeship-scheme-united-kingdom-1/

[4] Aerospace Maintenance Council – YouTube

Blah Blah Blah

To comment on British politics, Twitter maybe the perfect platform. It’s one of the ways commentary and observations can keep up with the pace of change. So febrile is the current landscape of British politics that it’s almost impossible to predict what will happen next. Naturally, there’s thousands who will volunteer their views. It’s a wonderful entertainment but probably not terribly helpful.

What makes a good politician, or at least what makes an effective politician in 2022? Let’s forget what makes a great politician because that category is only ever seen in the story books.

Setting our situation in the context: however good a person maybe they will make errors and have failures. Let’s not get hooked on the ridiculous idea that perfection is out there to be found. That’s the territory of ideology and fanatics. There’s too many of them in Twitter-land.

What makes a good politician? I think it does come down to fundamentals. There is a big word that stands out in any community. It has done throughout history. It’s that simple but sometimes illusive quality of TRUST.

It’s not enough to stand in front of a group of citizens and espouse trustworthiness. It’s not enough to say – trust me, I know what I’m doing. There must be believability built on sound evidence. That’s a record of saying things and doing things that are correct, consistent, and coherent.

Not easy to do. The frenetic speed of News is like a hungry monster wanting to be feed minute by minute. Say too much and arguments are pulled apart ruthlessly. Say too little and the vacant space is filled with speculation.

Getting beyond the blah blah blah of ephemeral commentary is not so easy. Trust and communication can’t be separated. Saying what you mean and meaning what you say must run through every message.

Am I being naively contradictory? To start, I emphasised that it’s human to get thing wrong now and then. If public communications must meet unobtainable standards what hope does any politician have in this new media world?

Well, there’s a balance to be struck. That’s where we are – way off balance. Like a wobbly wheel spinning on a worn out axal. Both the wheel and the axel need replacing.

chaos

October 2022 and the art of defending the indefensible is rife. There’s a lot of it about. In Great British Bake-Off style, it’s to take a really badly made sponge cake and coving it with colourful decorative icing and sprinkles. It’s a simple deception. It’s the practice of turning awful News on its head. Intention being to avoid accountability for that unwelcome daily News.

Ministers so up to their necks in almighty screw-ups, travel the media studios spouting endless reasons why things have never been better and there’s no other choice but to stick with “the plan.” The word Growth gets banded around as it was glue powerful enough to hold smashed atoms togther.

Global economic headwinds, pressures amplified by conflict and devious opponents all are all depicted as the reasons why international markets are sticking two fingers up to this Conservative Government. Speculators are loving it. As unpredictable turbulence always opens opportunity for a few people to make a great deal of money.

Articles with such titles as: power cuts are not so bad, higher mortgage costs create a sense of responsibility, don’t pamper poor children and global issues cause our woes. It’s difficult to understand journalists and newspaper readers who think misery is good for you. It must be that the people who write such material are hired guns without a moral compass. They are paid to churn out counter factual editorials, warped options, and shock jock entertainments.

What’s the answer to this cavalcade of absurdly? Unsustainable situations are not solved by walking on by. There’s a strong need for a refresh. That does mean a General Election.

I know I’ve said a General Election is not on the cards for 2022. What’s new is that the more old school Conservatives, who’s order of priority is – Country, Consitituency, Party – are showing signs that they realise their Party is hurting the Country.

There is a petition to “Call an immediate general election to end the chaos of the current government[1]” and it is scheduled to be debated in Westminster. No prizes for what the outcome will be but, in a way, that’s not the point. An election is on the agenda.

NOTE: Sacking Kwasi Kwarteng is a desperate attempt to distract from the disastrous consequences of the PM’s own policies. It has been a day when the chickens have come home to roost.


[1] https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/619781

Air Taxi 2

As a quick effort at simple research, I looked at several local government websites searching for Air Taxi or Urban Air Mobility (UAM) or Advanced Air Mobility (AAM). The result was lots of blanks with one or two exceptions[1][2]

There’s numerous articles about e-scooters and how they might be integrated into cityscapes.

Addressing local governments, much of what has been published to date concerns the use of drones. Yes, the use of drones is happening here and now, so this is not such a surprise. However, to me, this was a reminder that the frenetic world of aviation often discussed the future in rooms full of like-minded people. Embracing a wider audience is overdue.

In the case of UAM/AAM, innovations in civil aviation are move beyond airports, upper airspace, and specialist technical interest. If the electrification of flight is to take hold it will touch the lives of many more people than conventional commercial aviation.

These new aviation developments will generate new business models and offer new services. This is challenging stuff. It’s clear to me that, without the agreement of local authorities such enterprises will be dead before they start.

National governments may take a regulatory approach that imposes on local governments. That would be ill advised and ultimately unsustainable. A cooperative partnership would open a smooth transition from transport novelty to accepted everyday part of mobility.

Local authorities will need to adapt their formal local plans to include planning considerations of zoning, land-use, multi-modal matters, environmental impact, construction, utilities/support infrastructure, public privacy and much more.

Local government is a partner in risk management too. Just as highway authorities wrestle with improving road safety so, no doubt, UAM/AAM accidents and incidents will be on their agenda.

Fostering public-private partnerships is talked about but few examples have moved beyond theory and into practice.

POST 1: These issues have been highlighted at ICAO this year Urban Air Mobility and the Role of Air Transport – ICAO 2022 Innovation Fair – ICAO TV

POST 2: The organisation is looking at possible future operations https://varon.aero/

POST 3: People taking a holistic view http://www.supernal.aero


[1] https://www.civataglobal.org/

[2] https://www.urbanairmobilitynews.com/global-map/

Where are we?

From time to time, we do need to remind ourselves what the differences are between pollical parties and their thinking. Those differences are particularly stark now. In fact, dangerously stark.

So called “conservatives” are in defensive mode. They are lashing out having lost popular support and legitimacy across the nation. The misinformation is suggesting the opposition will form a “monstrous coalition” with other parties. Failing to recognise that the Conservative Party of 2022 is as monstrous coalition at war with itself.

In my mind there has never been a better time to argue for Proportional Representation (PR).  It’s a good way that a diversity of political thinking can be fairly represented. My words here are not an academic discourse so please don’t quote literate sources that point to flaws in my opinion.

Libertarian: It’s Anti-Government Government. In other words, reduce the size of the State to the absolute minimum. Thus, remove regulation and social support to create what is often called “UK PLC”. It’s a devil take the hind most thinking. Images of such a society are best captures in William Hogarth’s Gin Lane[1]. A small elite control and prosper but the majority languish.

Socialist: Almost the reverse of the above. Where the State is mother and father of every citizen. The “greater good” transcends individual aspirations and rights. Life is codified and regimented. A levelling takes place where tall poppies[2] are loped off ruthlessly. A small elite control and prosper but the majority languish.

Traditionally, these two have been characterised as far “right” and “left” in politics. Naturally, it’s not so simple as that because there’s lots of variations on the above themes. One common thread is that they both end up becoming authoritarian and destructive. Some would show the ends of the political spectrum as anti-authoritarian (anarchists) at one end and dictators at the other. So, there’s more than a few different ways of cutting the cake.

Where are we? It’s my belief that the vast majority to not fit in either of these two camps.

We live in a liberal democracy or have done until now. That, when it’s working well, balances individual aspiration with social responsibility. Our rights are respected at the same time as recognising our common journey as a nation. We work together to ensure that opportunity is spread far and wide. We cherish our environment. We build coalitions with common goals.

Britan needs to stop and take stock. The Conservative Party is pushing the whole nation in a direction it doesn’t not want to go. It’s strident libertarians are on a disastrous path. These are dangerous times.


[1] https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/picture/2012/sep/12/william-hogarth-gin-lane

[2] https://wordhistories.net/2018/11/12/tall-poppy-origin/

Unsustainable

One Minister say we want more immigration. Another Minister says we want less immigration. One Minister say we want to tax less. Another Minister says we want to keep taxes. One Minister say we want shale gas. Another Minister says we do not want shale gas. One Minister say we want more building everywhere. Another Minister says we want less building everywhere. One Minister say we can put tackling climate change on hold. Another Minister says we must act on the climate. One Minister wants to privatise the NHS. Another Minister supports public health provision. And, so on and so on.

What we have is an unsustainable UK Government without a mandate. No wonder the financial markets have been spooked. The more Ministers zigzag, U-turn, and twist and turn the more damage they do. In Truss and Kwarteng’s first month of Government chaos, it is reported that around £300 billion has been wiped off value of UK assets.

The UK is facing its biggest crisis since the Second World War. The threat is the Conservative Party. Their abject inability to set-out what they stand for has left the Conservative Party vulnerable to volatile knee jerk reactions and being led by the nose by fringe interests.

Poltical parties contain people with different interests and views. When there’s no alignment and common purpose holding those people togther then the fabric of a party fails. Trying to head this off, leaderships often get louder, more irrational and clutch at straws. Prime Minister Truss received Conservative Party conference applauds to her “anti-growth coalition” slogan but this is crazy in the context of recent Government preformance.

What is observable across the globe is that right-wing populist politicians love confrontation. They enjoy shouting down opponents. They like controversies of their own making that they can then attribute to others. The Conservative Party is broken.

Our immediate concern needs to be that this Government is sleep-walking into a mass of avoidable catastrophes as we move into the winter of 2022. Sadly, now, they are practicing the cartoon pose of an ostrich with its head in the sand.