Economic Growth in Post-Brexit UK: A Call to Action

I do remember when there was a British newspaper called The Daily Telegraph. It represented establishment views. Was rather stuffy and what you might expect a certain type of middle-class accountant or lawyer to be reading on their commute to work.

It has become a pamphlet for the alt-right, supporters of oligarchies and whacky think-tanks pumped full of money from climate change deniers and overseas sources.

The sort of right-thinking people who gifted us with Liz Truss as Prime Minister. I shouldn’t be so dismissive because as recent history has shown these daily publications still have influence.

Now, Labour’s Chancellor of the Exchequer is shouting growth, growth, growth from the rafters. Not that her cry is an entirely bad one, it’s just that she is saying this with mufflers on her ears.

The Chancellor is right that the most important issue of the moment is the economy. There are a lot of people pointing out that a quick way to improve the UK’s economic situation is to knock down the barriers we have erected with mainland Europe. Next door is a huge market for our products and services.

Labour was telling us to believe in Brexit and that they could make it work. Most people know that this was last year’s meaningless words spread about before an election. Polling now shows that most people favour closer ties with our neighbours[1].

In some senses there’s little change. People are more likely to see the Lib Dems as anti-Brexit and the Conservatives as pro-Brexit. They remain unsure about Labour’s position. So, when the call goes out from the Lib Dems for closer economic ties with the European Union (EU) a whole host of predicable nonsense is said and published in newspapers like The Daily Telegraph.

Labour’s dithering makes the possibility of growth, growth, growth seem as unreliable as their protestations of love for Brexit before last year’s election.

The direction of travel is mighty obvious. Brexit has failed. Corrective action is long overdue. Forward thinking politicians really need to step-up and fight for a prosperous and economically successful Europe. One that includes us.

Labour has this term of government to make its mark. If it doesn’t then the possibility of extreme political elements getting a foothold in the UK are significant. Dithering for 5-years will be the biggest mistake after that of 2016. Corrective action may have a political cost in the immediate short-term, but the long-term benefits are there for all to see.

[1] https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/how-the-government-is-handling-the-issue-of-brexit-in-the-uk

Discontent with Conservatives

Those who stuck with the Conservatives at the last UK General Election must be regretting it. After their appalling record in government there are still 121 Conservative Party members of Parliament (MPs). This is the lowest number in the history of the Conservative Party. Parliamentary consistencies, like Reigate[1] and Staines[2], places where I have lived, have little, or no effective representation as the new year gets into its stride.

For what worth they are at this time in the electoral cycle, the Conservative Party and Reform Party (or company) are scrambling around trying to salvage any influence they can get. Both parties are no longer supported by their signed-up membership preferring major donors to pay the bills instead.

Frankly, we have no idea of their real membership numbers[3]. Political party membership hasn’t exactly been booming across the board. What’s clear is that the residual Conservative Party and Reform people are fishing in the same pond.

Last night, I happened to catch part of a Conservative political broadcast on the BBC. The general theme was politicians have let you down. This was said by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch in a non-specific way to avoid saying Conservative politicians have let you down.

I did begin to wonder if she wouldn’t have done better by hosting a daytime cooking show from her immaculate kitchen. Now, I want to know if her mug had coffee or tea in it or was it just and empty prop? It seems to me every time Conservative rebrand, we see a different shade of blue being presented in the media. They are lucky that so many shades of blue are possible.

In the News too is Nigel Farage’s cold shouldering in the US. He may no longer be the far-right’s political great hope for the future. Reform may have to look elsewhere for its champion.

The 650 MPs that were elected by you and me to the House of Commons, at the 4 July 2024 UK General Election are likely to get a full-term. I’d guess that the new government can live with being relatively unpopular for at least a couple of years. After that they had better start showing that life has got better, public services work otherwise they will be a one hit wonder.

For political watchers its going to be fascinating to see how the pseudo-war on the right of politics will pan out in the UK. Will they combine? Having lived through the SDP–Liberal Alliance back in the 1980s, I know how hard it can be to restructure and reorientate in the British context.

There’s a lot of spinning of the wheels. Interim pain and uncomfortable partnering. The certainty being that not everyone will be happy or contented. Some notable people will go off in a huff. Eggs will get broken.

Or are we in a new era media where all that’s needed is tons of fakery and magical thinking. Plush marketing and dramatic assertions backed up by absolutely nothing.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/E14001442

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/E14001505

[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq62qv3486qo

Financial Pressures and Local Government Restructuring

It was a long time ago, but I remember the travails of local government reorganisation. A massive amount of councillor and officer time was consumed. Endless discussions going backwards and forwards. Loads of heat but little light.

I had my one term as a Surrey County Councillor between 1993 and 1997. Now, that is 30-years back. A lot of water has passed under the bridge since. That said, the issues are still hanging in the air. The outcome of that Conservative attempt at local government reorganisation was no change for the one million people in Surrey. That meant one large County Council and eleven smaller Boroughs and Districts. Not forgetting several Town and Parish Councils.

Having moved, my concern is now local government reorganisation in Berkshire. The situation here is that the two-tier structure of local government has already been swept away. We pay our council tax to one unitary local authority.

Here we are in a different time and place. Labour’s first six months in government behind us. A new era. All smiles to begin. Sadly, the write-ups of the last six-months are less than flattering[1]. It would be reasonable to think that during a period of opposition in Parliament. Those 14-years. The prospective future government would have put in place policies and plans that would have been “oven ready,” to use a term an unsuccessful past Prime Minister would use.

Just as it was 30-years ago, English local government is facing huge financial pressures. Residents are struggling to access good services. Local issues, like potholes, planning, special educational needs and social care are as intractable as they always have been.

So, is this the time to bring out local government reorganisation again? Regardless of what I think, it’s clear that Jim McMahon MP, Minister of State (Minister for Local Government and English Devolution) has local government reorganisation on his agenda[2].

From what I hear, existing county Boroughs and Districts are going to become history. Small unitary authorities had better watch out too. Council leaders are being asked to find ways of building scale. That means no English local authority smaller than a population of half a million.

Will this turn around performance? Economies of scale may have some benefits. The problem that strikes me is the notion that “local”, meaning a natural community, is generally much less than 500,000 people. Especially in rural areas.

The Government White Paper that sets out these plans is called “English Devolution”. An interesting use of that nice word. In the circumstances that the new Minister imagines it could be that local government becomes more and more an implementing arm of central government. No more or less. To some extent this is already the cases, but localism and community are not completely extinguished. The tension continues to be one between governance being top-down or bottom-up driven.

The Labour government might imagine this “silver bullet” will harmonise, sanitise and make local services run like clockwork. I wonder if it will.

[1] https://inews.co.uk/news/messy-muddled-starmer-struggles-worse-rebellion-3444812

[2] https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/event/government-2025-conference

Hot tin roof

At Christmas, conversations across the dinner table flow in all sorts of different directions. Once or twice, they do evoke memories that resonate. Days in the 1960s and 70s that are half remembered and maybe embellished.

It’s a steel three-bay Dutch Barn that brings us together. This old barn still stands but is more than likely riddled with rust and decay. It no longer does what it did during my childhood. That is holding hundreds of hay bales.

One of the regular farm duties was to give the barn a complete coating of “red oxide” paint. That’s the galvanised roof structure and not the tall steel columns that kept everything in place.

Up to the 1970s, lead was added to some red oxide paints. On refection, hours spent spreading this gloopy liquid about the corrugated barn roof was probably hazardous. The consolation being that this painting job was done on a completely exposed roof. That’s about as open air a job as any painting job can get. I remember the paint dried very quickly. That could be annoying.

The barn ran roughly East – West, with the lean-to section being exposed to the full force of any wind from the North. Getting up on the barn roof was easy. One side of the barn had a full-length lean-to section. It didn’t take much of a ladder to climb onto the lower part of the lean-to roof. The slope was steep enough to require a degree of care but the bolts that held the galvanised sheets in place helped add some grip for our boots.

My childhood experiments were ridiculous. They made eminent sense that the time. One involved making a parachute out of used black polyethene hay rick covering and baler twine and testing it by jumping off the barn lean-to roof. Remarkably this never resulted in any broken bones. I can only think that was down to the soft, muddy grass that I landed on. More mud than grass a lot of the time.

A completely different story is about filling the hay barn. Doing what it was designed to do. That’s store hay bales for the winter. Now, imagine the middle of summer. Blazing sunshine. A hot tin roof and the awkward spaces under it. Dry air, dust and noise everywhere. Working to self-imposed deadlines to get the hay in before the weather changed.

Today, mechanisation has taken the shear drudgery out of the annual ritual of haymaking. Most of the work is done sitting on a tractor. That might even be air-conditioned.

Let’s say, I’m talking about 1975, or a year either side. My dad, brother and I would be staking the hay bales in the barn. My mum would be on a loaded trailer putting the bales on an elevator. One by one. For the first five or six layers of hay bales we’d have an open space to work in. My brother and I would compete by showing off how far we could throw the bales as they came off the elevator. As we went up, layer by layer so the job got tougher and tougher. There was less space to work in. The heat and dust became almost overpowered.

Those are the moments I remember. Sweating like no sauna can make anyone sweat. As each hay bale came up, we’d have to think more carefully about where to put it. Stooped as we were compressed against the barn roof. That’s when our thoughts were to get the job done as quickly as possible. In these intense conditions, the thought of only having to do this job once a year and prospect of ice cream were just about enough to get us through.

+/- leadership

Daily writing prompt
What makes a good leader?
View all responses

I’m past expecting “good”. There’re a million management books that pamper the art of perfection. Buy another book on management and the keys to success are assured. Like hell they are. There’s certainly more than enough advice about what makes a good leader.

Why don’t we focus on being a normal human leader? Let’s just say that we are all flawed. It’s embedded in Christianity with the biblical phrase – let’s he who is without sin throw the first stone. A great imperative but easily ignored by a bad leader.

I’d say a good leader is one that doesn’t consciously act as a bad leader. What do I mean? Here’s a snippet of the worst of the most mediocre managers I’ve worked for over the decades.

A traitor. A head who will have a group hug to agree a line on a difficult subject before going into an important meeting. Then as the meeting progresses poorly, throws his team members under the bus to save his own skin. When the going gets tough, the tough get going.

A showman. A polished head who drips with confidence and hutzpah. Says and does anything that raises their profile above any of his team. Always takes credit when things go well. Always in the picture. Ready for a quote. Rarely wavers or sees any damage done.

An emperor. An attractive head who initially engages and embraces his team members. Has a strong intellect. Learns all he can of their ideas and experiences. Uses that knowledge to his own advantage. Then demotes or discards or rides rough shod over his former colleagues.

A good leader maybe flawed. But “good” does not pursues the three above. Now, let’s turn to a positive reflection. Here’s three categories to look for.

A mentor. When you meet a head and your first thought is – I want to be like them. I want to know what they know. That’s the time when “good” becomes real. Here’s a learning opportunity to be grabbed with both hands.

A motivator. There are heads who walk into a room and the whole atmosphere changes. They stand at a podium and with a few words change the agenda. Never dull and predicable. They tackle the gritty questions of why and how.

A doer. That head who doesn’t just spout fine words. Through their reputation and list of achievements they show that positive change can happen. They can lead a team to achieve more than the sum of the parts.

Turn the clock back

Daily writing prompt
If you could un-invent something, what would it be?
View all responses

Innovation is much of a byword. Climate crisis, feeding the world, ending wars, curing disease, creating endless energy, conquering space – they can all be done if someone, somewhere, just invents something smart right now. We are greater believers in the power of “invention” than we have ever been. Doesn’t matter if sitting on the right or left of politics.

Invention and discovery are not the same. Discovery is to uncover something we had not known or understood before. However, that something was always there waiting to be discovered.

Invention is for makers and dreamers. A contraption, a connection, a way of doing business, a machine or a crazy idea. Invention has a huge spectrum. I’ve never been to the Heath Robinson Museum[1]. Now, I mean to go.

To un-invent presupposes that it can be done. It has been done in the past. The classical world benefited from inventions that were lost in the dark ages. Later to be rediscovered.

Genuinely to uninvent is hard. Human imagination, with so many people on the planet, mitigates against it. Uninventing may be a short-lived move.

My view is that it would be best to try to un-invent a damaging idea or process. For example, let’s uninvent slavery or subjugation.

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

Classic Sports Car’s Legacy

I had two of them. It was a basic sports car that last came off the production line at the end of 1979. About 45 years-ago in Oxfordshire, England. The MG Midget was much loved.

The “Frogeye” Sprite came first. Then this small sports car went through several evolutions. Ending with the 1500 version[1]. Some say the 1500 version was the worst. I’d say that it had its ideocracies but remained great fun to own and drive. The heavy rubber bumpers were added to meet US market safety requirements. The extra power of the Triumph 1500 engine compensated to some extent, but they were a style disaster. On the positive side, whenever parked, those slab like matt black rubber bumpers, front and back, doubled up as seats.

It’s something in common with most roadgoing cars of the past. The MG Midget was considerably smaller than most cars being driven in 2025. Strange that the roads themselves haven’t changed as much as the cars of the day.

The lanes of Somerset and Dorset wind through the countryside in a pattern that makes little sense unless you study either the size and shape of ancient field systems or the Romans. The contrast is great. Twisting cart tracks that became tarmacked roads or straight lines that were forced onto the landscape in a point-to-point style. The lesser of them hasn’t had a great deal of attention. Thank God, you might say. There are still lanes that link small hamlets and farms that have grass growing down their middle. Overhanging dense hedges on either side.

Those were the roads that gave the most joy of driving my MG sports car. Not at any great speed. Open top with the summer sunshine through the trees and a breeze, what could be better?

Fine, caution is, and was, needed where fresh mud and tractors conspired to add some hazards. Visibility restricted and deep ditches or dirt banks added a few more. I did once come to grief because of farmyard mud. One of those places where the farmyard and the lane were indistinguishable. A herd of cows being paraded up and down the lane every day.

Sadly, my jet black “V” registration MG Midget sat in my garage for many years. Plans to get welding done and tidy-up the soft top never came to anything. I sold it. I can say: I wish I’d kept it. Trouble is that nice wish was never going to be realised.

Now, I live just down the road from Abingdon where all the MG sports cars were made. I do mean to explore the town as the weather improves.

[1] https://www.mgcc.co.uk/midget-register/midget-register/history/

Advancements in Flight Recorder Technology and Regulations

My last posting addressed accident flight recorders and airworthiness requirements. That’s not enough. It’s important to note that aircraft equipage standards are addressed in operational rules. So, the airworthiness requirements define what an acceptable installation looks like but as to whether an operator needs to have specific equipage or not, that’s down to the operational rules in each country.

Internationally, the standards and recommended practices of ICAO Annex 6 are applicable. These cover the operation of aircraft. Flight recorders are addressed in para 6.3.1. and Appendix 8. Let’s note that ICAO is not a regulator. There are international standards but operational rules in each country apply to each country’s aircraft.

One of the major advances in accident flight recorders technology is the capability to record more data than was formerly practical. This has led to standards for Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVRs) advancing from 2-hour recording duration to 25-hours.

Proposed rule changes have been hampered by the impact of the global pandemic. Some new operational rules apply only to newly built aircraft. That means some existing aircraft can retain their 2-hour CVRs.

Another technology advance is what’s known as Recorder Independent Power Supply (RIPS). RIPS can provided power to the CVR for at least 10 minutes after aircraft electrical power is lost. The RIPS is often offered as a relatively straightforward aircraft modification.

I do not know if the South Korea Boeing 737-800 was required to have accident recorders with the capabilities listed above. If they were not, then there’s a good basis for recommending that changes be made to existing aircraft.

Understanding Aircraft Accident Recorders

There’s quite a bit of chatter on social media about accident flight recorders.

One of the skills required by an aircraft accident investigator, and not often mentioned, is the ability to grapple with rules, regulations, and technical requirements. This is given that civil aviation is one of the most highly regulated industries in the world.

The story of the development of the accident flight recorder is a long one. No way can a few words here do justice to all the efforts that has been made over decades to ensure that this vital tool for accident and incident investigation does what it’s intended to do.

In fact, that’s the first technical requirement to mention for accident recorders. Namely, FAR and CS Subpart F, 25.1301: Each item of installed equipment must be of a kind and design appropriate to its intended function. That basic intended function being to preserve a record of aircraft operational data post-accident.

Aircraft accident recorders are unusual. They are mentioned in the airworthiness requirements, however they play no part in the day-to-day airworthiness of an aircraft. The reality is more nuanced than that, but an aircraft can fly safely without working flight recorders.

FAR and CS 25.1457 refers to Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVR)[1] and 25.1459 refers to Flight Data Recorders[2]. Both CVR and FDR receive electrical power from the aircraft electrical bus that provides the maximum reliability for operation of the recorder without jeopardising service to essential or emergency electrical loads. Both CVR and FDR should remain powered for as long as possible without jeopardising aircraft emergency operations.

Before drawing too many conclusions, it’s important to look at the above certification requirements in relation to their amendment state at the time of type certification of an aircraft.

If the aircraft of interest is the Boeing 737-800 then the FAA Type Certification date is 13 March 1998 and the EASA / JAA Type Certification date is 9 April 1998. Without wading through all the detailed condition, the certification basis for the above aircraft type was FAR Part 25 Amendment 25-77 and JAR 25 Change 13 [Note: EASA did not exist at the time].

FAR and CS 25.1457 and 25.1459 were in an earlier state than that which is written above. That said, the objective of powering the recorders in a reliable way was still applicable. There was no requirement for the CVR or FDR to be powered by a battery. What hasn’t changed is the requirement for a means to stop a recorder and prevent erasure, within 10 minutes after a crash impact. That’s assuming that aircraft electrical power was still provided.

So, when it’s reported that the South Korea Boeing 737 accident recorders[3] are missing the final 4 minutes of recoding, the cause is likely to be the loss of the aircraft electrical buses or termination by automatic means or the removal of power via circuit breakers. We will need to wait to hear what is found as the on-going accident investigation progresses.

[1] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-25.1457

[2] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-25.1459

[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjr8dwd1rdno

Navigating AI

In my travels, I’ve seen derelict towns. The reason they were built has passed into history. A frantic fever swept through an area like an unstoppable storm. It might have been precious metals that excited the original residents. Gold rushes feed the desire to get rich quick. It doesn’t take the greatest minds in the world to figure out why gold fever will always have an appeal. The onrush of people joining the throng keeps going until opportunities have collapsed.

Breakthrough technologies, or their potential, can be just like a gold rush. There’s no doubt that 2025 will be a year of such phenomena. Top of the list is Artificial Intelligence AI[1]. If you want to be a dedicated follower of fashion[2], then AI is the way to go. Thank you, The Kinks. Your lyrics are as apt now as they were in the 1960s.

Predications range from the best thing since sliced bread to the end of humanity. Somewhere along that line is realism. Trouble is that no one really likes realism. It can be somewhat dull.

I’ve always viewed advancing technologies as a two-edged sword. On the one hand there are incredible benefits to be reaped. On the other, costs can be relatively unpredictable and devastating. I say “relatively unpredictable” as there’s always the advantage of knowledge with hindsight. Lots of commentators love to practice that one.

In desperation to gain the economic benefits of AI the current utterances of the UK Government may seem a little unwise[3]. Certainly, there’s nothing wrong with wishing to build a significant domestic capacity in this area of technology. What’s concerning is to always talk of legislation and regulation as a burden. Particularly when such language comes from lawmakers.

The compulsion to free-up opportunity for a western style gold rush like scenario has a downside. That is all too evident in the historic records. Ministers in this new Labour Government remind me of Mr. Gove’s past mantra – we’ve had enough of experts. Rational dialogue gets sidelined.

Even now we have seen generative search engines produce summaries of complex information sources that are riddled with holes. This experience reminds me of past work cleaning up aviation accident databases. Removing all those 2-engined Boeing 747s and airport IDs with one letter transposed. Data by its nature isn’t always correct. The old saying, to err is human, is always applicable.

The concerning aspect of AI output is its believability. If error rates are very low, then we stop questioning results. It gets taken for granted that an answer to a question will be good and true. There we have a potential problem. What next. AI to check AI? Machines to check machines? There lies a deep rabbit hole.

[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/01/08/1109188/whats-next-for-ai-in-2025/

[2] https://youtu.be/stMf0S3xth0

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/11/uk-can-be-ai-sweet-spot-starmers-tech-minister-on-regulation-musk-and-free-speech