Rick´s News

Exactly 4 weeks have passed since my last text and although there have been no significant changes on the political stage there has been a considerable amount of shuffling in the wings. Theresa May is still Prime Minister with her DUP crutch and Jeremy Corbyn is continuing to embrace Brexit whereby offering people a deal with the EU that, if anything, lends support to the argument that he doesn´t know what he is talking about.
The once strong and stable and very predictable play has become an unrehearsed farce and no-one dare guess what´s going to happen next or who´s got what part. The prompter is shouting down the leading lady and reading from a text that has little resemblance to the earlier agreed upon script. Tories and Labour are still publicly hugging and kissing on Brexit yet with increasingly obvious distaste, not only for each other but also for a political stance that threatens their claim to power.
There has though been significant change on the whole atmosphere of Brexit. From ”Brexit means Brexit” or hard Brexit with or without a deal to soft Brexit with a variety of flavours. ”Brexit will not happen,” has also been added as a no longer crazy option as has, ”if we leave the EU” rather than ”when.” Of course Theresa May´s botched election has opened up for this but also very much the fact that the penny has finally dropped, together with the pound, as people are beginning to understand not only the great harm Brexit will do directly affecting more people than previously expected but also that it will not solve the problems that people worry most about.
Different polls, even one in the Daily Express, reflect the changing mood showing a majority for Remain. This change of mood is as yet not forceful or prolonged enough to be publicly acknowledged by the Tories or Labour but it is making life extremely difficult for both Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, be sure of that.
Should this continue, the road to Brexit and the entailing disasters will have been taken despite ”the will of the people,” referendum or no and the cost of doing that requires little imagination. From a Remainer´s point of view the icing on the cake is that Parliament lacks a majority to support Brexit, there are even talks of a cross party revolt, not to mention the House of Lords, granted new political clout by the Tories minority manifesto.
So who will end Theresa and Jeremy´s gridlock? For the time being Labour has a strong hand and every wish to raise the stakes but pretending to have a full house with only 2 aces might turn into quite a problem. As for Theresa May the decision is unlikely to be hers. She is damaged goods beyond repair. Brexit has been likened to a bus over a cliff. That bus is still heading for the cliff with a confused driver and a bus conductor trying to find a way to appease squabbling passengers many more now voicing concerns about their destination. Most people are becoming aware that driving over the Brexit cliff is not the sensible thing to do. For this reason I am convinced there will be no Brexit. In fact I am convinced there will be no shade of Brexit whatsoever as the varieties of a soft Brexit are just not worth the effort, please no-one and leave the UK as politically emasculated as a hard Brexit. So, what happens now? The ball is in the Tory court and requires some nifty footwork. The choices? 1. Continue plugging Brexit with or without May, risking a general election, a Labour majority and no Brexit. 2. Sack May, change tack, admit that the consequences of Brexit would be too damaging for the country at the same time supporting the theory that the election was lost due to hard line Brexit and electorate regrets and then hang on. 3. Same as 1. only in the unlikely event that Labours succeeds in implementing Brexit, wait for the crash and pick up the pieces.
Brexit was to be exploited by both Labour and Tory to meet their own ends. To everyone’s surprise it has turned around and bitten them on the political backside and threatens to devour one or both of them in the future depending on the outcome. Whatever the outcome, it is painfully obvious that the UK needs a new political force that has the interests of its people at heart rather than ideologies of socialist utopia or raw capitalism.

The last few months of British politics have presented Brits and other Europeans not to mention a very interested world, a picture of how things should not be done if you intend being successful in business or politics or just keeping the kids in order at home. Obviously the stakes are different as are the rewards and falls. The methodology varies also but the basics of leadership simply cannot be ignored. The results of the referendum caused political turmoil and clearly showed that the people of the UK were divided on such a crucially important issue as membership of the EU. The internal disputes within the Tory party, to which the referendum was to put an end, had now spilled over and infected a nation. As a newly appointed Prime Minister Theresa May had a unique chance to prove herself as the leader of a whole country. It wasn’t as if any first steps towards analysing the situation and tentatively sounding the ground would have caused much of an uproar and even if it had, her leadership would not have been seriously questioned for inviting further dialogue. The referendum was advisory and its one question opened up for a hundred new questions leaving plenty of political space. The fact that the referendum result was so close is also a strong argument in democratic terms where major changes crave more than a simple majority. Even Theresa May´s mandate in parliament was such that an invitation to cross-party dialogue could hardly raise eyebrows and would enable her to marginalize her own most vociferous hard Brexiters. This course of action would also have been completely compatible with her having campaigned for Remain.
For whatever reasons none of this happened and Theresa May came down firmly on the Brexit side even hinting on a hard Brexit. The questions and the political dialogue she rejected and could have controlled if she had invited them, now blew up in her face. Hard Brexit, soft Brexit, freedom of movement, financial crisis, etc. etc. Leading a country may be difficult but addressing people in that country so that everyone understands is a gift given to few. Short and simple with a lucid message. With ”Brexit means Brexit” Theresa May continued digging her hole. Anyone with the most rudimentary grasp of the English language from a 3 year old upwards would ask, ”what does the lady mean?” An understandable first reaction and a likely second reaction with a little afterthought. ”We don´t know what Brexit means, does she think we´re all stupid?”
”Strong and Stable” as a follow up when announcing her u-turn decision to hold an election didn’t help matters and the country became aware that it was ”Weak and Wobbly” refusing a TV debate with other party leaders. Just forgetting these rather silly sound bites for a moment the picture is becoming clearer that Theresa May has little inclination for dialogue. This is akin to a lifeguard afraid of the water. The election results came as a welcome surprise? Everybody lost but no one admitting it. Hung parliament, what is to be done? Theresa May was given a second albeit slim chance of showing she is a capable leader. Her answer? No mention of her lost majority, no humility, no respectful response to the people who did or did not vote for her. ”Lets get to work” on Brexit with the DUP. Theresa May isn´t listening, she is still busy digging her hole.
The inevitable: very soon she will be replaced as Prime Minister.
The obvious: she was never up to the job.

As a new follower of Twitter since January of this year I have become almost addicted to its political profile. The constant flow of information, disinformation, points of view, lies, facts, cartoons, jokes, political fun-making, cruel innuendo, sharp analysis, political codswallop etc etc. Twitter has just about everything and more often than not is completely up to date on many issues often giving me the feeling of being at the head of the information queue. My first week or so I lapped it all up only eventually beginning to realise the wisdom of exercising a certain degree of caution. Although outright lying is quite in fashion these days, all dressed up in its new suit of alternative facts, it is often easily recognised as such. There is though a large grey zone between the obvious porky and what might be considered as an undeniable fact. The things to watch out for are the untruths concealed by facts, like quicksands concealed by swirling mists on the moors. Sophisticated deception can be, just telling the truth. I think our society accepts and understand this and nowadays most people listen for the off-key note when a trumpet is blown on behalf of someone or something. Choosing toothpaste is easy and the cause of less anxiety than for instance buying a used car, a process which is more likely to be given a great deal more thought. Hopefully voting will merit even greater thought.

Regarding Brexit the one thing people seem to agree upon is that it will be a game changer. To what extent remains to be seen. Theresa May says categorically that she is the right person to lead the negotiations with Brussels. Strong and Stable is our leader, death or victory is her cause. Put that to music, bagpipes for the moment, and off we march. The swirling mist here is the strong and stable leader prepared for death or victory. There will be no ”bad deal” only a ”good deal” because we are prepared for death, sorry I mean ”no deal.” Theresa May talks of a strong hand based on good election results being the answer to helping her ”getting Brexit right.”  She even hints on the possibilities of not getting it right, more it seems to attract the extra votes than anything else. Helping our leader in her quest for ”getting it right” making Britain fairer, stronger and more prosperous should be our patriotic duty. Who can argue with that? Nice and cosy, all wrapped up. Would someone put the kettle on.

This is all very well but what actually do we know or think we know? ”Soft Brexit” will be some sort of special agreement with the EU. It will involve giving and taking on both sides. The resulting balance of give and take will be defined by Theresa May as either a good or a bad deal. Now, as a previous remainer, she is of course completely aware that any partial deal will never be as good as full membership except for the kind of partial membership that involves only the benefits and none of the obligations. That is club membership with no fees or rules to abide by. The likelihood of this coming across is understandably nil. Somewhere along the line compromises have to be made. A strong and stable leader will of course see to it that compromises are not one sided but actually a gain for all.  I once said in an earlier Tweet that good leadership leads out of minefields or if you will out of marshes and not into them. No mention here that the reason Britain is up the proverbial creek in a barbed wire canoe is just this lack of strength, stability and leadership. The referendum was a cheap political gamble that didn’t pay off and the question asked in the referendum is on a par with ”would you like something to eat?”  A ”no” answer leaving no one in doubt as to what is required, with a ”yes” answer begging a second question.

At this stage the country was in dire need of not only strong and stable but also sensible leadership. At this stage Theresa May abdicated not only as a contender to the title of being strong and stable but also as being a competent leader of the UK. That second question never came, only ”Brexit means Brexit” or, ”you eat what you get.” What are we getting? There is a long list of what we will NOT be getting, either partially (Soft Brexit) or completely (Hard Brexit) What in fact are we getting that we didn’t have before? Nothing that warrants the risk of the UK splitting up and England becoming poorer and less influential in a Europe that would gladly see the opposite.

There is a slight breeze and if the mist disperses we may avoid falling into that quicksand and we may even find our way out of the marshes.

I spoke to a an old friend of mine on the telephone the other day and she obviously felt that in some way she had to explain what was happening in the country I grew up in. I do not recall her exact words but somewhere along the line the reasoning was that English/British people were different. I am not too sure which category she was referring to but noted a possible lapse of logic should she have been referring to the latter. For arguments sake I shall assume she meant English. ”We are different from the rest!” she said almost apologetically. Hmm, not exactly rocket science but there is of course an undertone. OK English people are different. To begin with they speak correct English without any annoying foreign accents not to mention deplorable colonial spelling. The English are also different because, in contrast to many other Europeans, the man on the street only speaks one language, English. The few that have retained a smattering of French from their schooldays  easily make a Frenchman´s toes curl on opening their ”bouches.” There are probably a thousand and one differences between an Englishman and any other nationality on the planet. Rocket science? Hardly. The fact is this applies much else to any one nationality and in my experience there is an awareness of being different from ”the rest” wherever you go. Looking at it from another angle you might ask yourself, what does an Englishman have in common with other nationalities. Well, as I already pointed out the sense of being different is a common national character anywhere in the world and in my experience, and this might come as a surprise to the average inhabitant of Blighty, just like the English most people feel somewhat different to ”foreigners”.  Now if being different is the natural state of things amongst the peoples of the globe so why point it out? Welcome to the undertone. Different is politely vague with no finer point to it and goes down well as a euphemism in circles where words like ”better” or ”superior” would be considered impolite and owned by no one. Different, despite its vagueness requires little explanation and easily answers the question ”why?”  ”Why are English people different from Swedish people?” ”Because English people make better tea.” No harm in that and generally speaking quite true, in my opinion. Why do you think the English way of life is superior to the Swedish way of life?  Only a moron would answer, ”because we´re English and we make better tea.”

I read an interesting yet rather disquieting article the other day written by a number of research scientists arguing that ageing should be classified as an illness. The idea being that this would release more resources in the fight against one of the major causes of illness which, perhaps not surprisingly for most of us, is old age. Ok, I can understand the financial argument as well as the natural link between age and illness. Defining ageing as an illness however raises a number of questions. I am 70 years old and in those years have had my share of infections and aches and pains, though thankfully nothing serious. A health expert once told me, ”you are as healthy as you feel” meaning that health is as much a matter of the mind as of the body which is something worth remembering with regard to age and illness. Now these guys come and tell me, no you´re ill no matter how you feel or what other ailments you may or may not have. The mind boggles. When was I afflicted with this illness? Was it when I succumbed to nature by looking in the mirror and accepting that I am old or was it on my 65th birthday or the day after my last day at work? To me this is akin to telling a perfectly healthy 25 year old that he is dying which of course is true but not imminent. No with all due respect, in my book ageing is not an illness, I hope you get your funds though so that you can treat me when I get ill.

Many Twitter followers were treated to a film clip where a television commentator, a professor of politics I am to understand, was interrupted by his small children entering the room during a broadcast. These children do what children do and their dad did what any dad would do. I dare say not many parents have experienced this situation live on television but certainly in other venues and just as embarrassing. No wonder the clip went viral with many of us both laughing at and I am sure, after the broadcast, with the the man and his children, recognizing him as one of us. He is saved by a woman who extracts the children from the room, bravely attempting to remain unseen by the camera. The programme was being broadcasted from Singapore and I assumed that the kids had done a runner from nanny. During the day there were a number of tweets and retweets about this incident. Especially one caught my eye suggesting that thinking the woman was a nanny had a racial twist to it. Why imagine that? Could not the professor, a white male, be married to her;  it appears he is. True enough, I stand corrected, or do I?  Hours later, after running this through my head and looking for evidence to strengthen my assumption that she was the nanny, the following occurred to me. What if I had assumed that the woman is the man´s wife?  Wouldn´t that have had an anti feminist twist to it by assuming it is the mother who takes care of the kids whilst the father is at work?

As it is put so nicely in Sweden. Whichever way you turn, your posterior is still at the back which is a rough translation of, tails I win, heads you lose. Just for the record, I´m not bothered if she is his wife or the nanny, it just reminded me of the joys of parenthood.

During the last month or so I have been receiving telephone calls from people who claim to be working for Microsoft. The English they speak is heavily accented and often only just reaches the mark of being understood. On the bright side they are extremely polite and more to the point, very concerned about my digital welfare. I have been informed that my Windows computer is behaving erratically on the Internet and that their computer department has detected serious defects in it. Not wanting to waste these peoples time out of consideration for their albeit misplaced concern, I quickly inform them that my computer is a Mac.  ”Not to worry sir, we have a Mac department that can help you.”

I think a lot of people at this stage would begin to challenge the wisdom of placing their computer welfare into the hands of ”computer experts” who cannot distinguish between a Mac and a Windows computer. Undoubtedly there are people who would continue the conversation for a while longer but I am sure that most of us would, somewhere along the line, arrive at the conclusion that they were being lied to and that there was something fishy going on and then put the phone down before being ripped off.

To me there is a parallel with Brexit here. You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time but not all all of the people all of the time.

Preventing them from putting the phone down is frightening.

Have you ever said ”what if” and wondered how different things would be? My most decisive ”what if” goes back a lifetime, fits into 30 seconds and can be summed up, ”what if I had opted for the cotton mills and chimney stacks?”

One day the London managing director of HRW, the publishing company I was working for, called me into his office. I had been informed earlier that the advertising division I had been a part of was to be closed down so I was feeling rather apprehensive. He began, with what I was convinced was to going to be a thank you and goodbye, by saying that although my department was being closed down the company did not want to lose me.  ”We have two area sales representative vacancies and if you are interested we would like to offer you one of them.”  I had only been with the company for a few months but knew this job entailed a lot of travelling to university cities, visiting bookshops as well as lecturers teaching subjects the company specialized in. He continued, ”the North West of England is one area and the other is Scandinavia.” Having lived most of my life in London or the Home Counties, the North West of England brought on images of cotton mills and chimney stacks. I gave it some thought though, about 30 seconds, and said, ”I´ll take Scandinavia,” coyly adding, ”It will give me the opportunity of learning  a new language.”

The Swedish word ”skatter” is the plural of ”skatt”  which has two meanings. Tax and  treasure. I never thought of this connection before reading a rather amusing article by Susanna Popova in today´s Svenska Dagbladet. She claims that taxes are something Swedes never joke about to which I wholeheartedly agree. Just to be clear on one point though, in my opinion Swedes do have a great sense of humour and never hesitate to see the funny side of most things. Swedish taxes just aren´t funny.

There are three predominant types of habitation in Sweden if you exclude summer camping in tents, mobile homes, caravans and time spent in little red and white summer cottages. They are renting a flat , owning your own house or being owner of a ”bostadsrätt” which literally translated means ”dwelling-right” Usually it means a block of flats where as a tenant you own a percentage of the whole and have a contract defining your own flat. It´s quite handy as everybody gets to share maintenance costs etc. by way of a monthly fee. The contract is bought and sold on an open market like any other dwelling. Things often work reasonably well, little different I would say, to owning your own flat at the same time paying homage to ”the Social Democrat that lives in every Swede.”  Wise words from a late friend of mine.

On its persistent treasure hunt to fill the nations coffers, the Swedish Tax Agency has now sniffed out the possibility of taxing dwelling-right owners if they have purchased extra space by e.g. buying a neighbouring flat and knocking down a wall or even if they have only bought a few extra square metres of parking space. The claim being that in theory the property was sold and bought again despite the owners not having moved an inch. We´re not talking pennies here but capital gains tax on the price difference the flat was purchased for and its new market value including the extra square metres.  For a house owner this would be like having to pay capital gains tax on one´s entire property just for buying the neighbour´s shed and the ground it stood on. Sweden´s Minister of Finance hasn’t been falling over herself to investigate possible legislation to avert what could have dire economic consequences for many people. She advises people to take the Tax Agency to court.

Enough to make a cat laugh but not a Swede.

When I first cameI to Stockholm I was often asked what I thought of Sweden . My answer would vary slightly depending on who was asking and any need of mine at the time to be provocative. This worked in both directions. A rosier picture when describing Sweden to my friends in England and somewhat more critical in the same situation in Sweden. My job which had me flitting around Scandinavia meant that my exposure to this Swedish culture shock was more in instalments, much like slowly walking into a freezing cold lake rather than jumping in. Well not too happy at first, I finally adjusted to the water. To be honest Sweden wasn’t the problem, as most people here seemed quite happy, the problem was me. I had been very fairly and politely treated by the Swedish Consulate in London, language was no problem until later when I started learning Swedish and everybody insisted on speaking English. The bank let me open 2 accounts, one private and one business, without a personal identity number. There was even a terrific pub on Grevgatan. Then what was my problem? Let me try and explain. First of all it was not only a terrific pub it was also the only terrific pub in the whole of Stockholm. Not that all the other pubs were sub-standard, they just didn’t exist. If you are young and live in Stockholm, close your eyes  and  just imagine for a minute: no pubs, very few restaurants, no coffee shops, no seating anywhere on a pavement outside, no pizzerias, no kebab stalls, no McDonalds or Burger King or any other hamburger joint for that matter. If you wanted a cold beer in a restaurant it  would have to be consumed with a sandwich or other food, local regulations. Well, I survived and somewhere along the line somebody realized the error of their ways and Stockholm today is one cool city. In another meaning you understand.