It does mean we are paying back more interest in the longer term but again I think that’s a price worth paying for more day to day flexibility. Also with presumed inflation the capital amount to be repaid should be less in real terms by redemption date.

Really the Greek difficulty was Ireland’s opportunity. Ireland, along with Portugal and possibly Spain, got lucky in terms of the wider European events conspiring to mean an overall solution had to be brokered. In the early days the thinking from Europe seemed to have been to “make an example” out of Ireland however as the solution was rolled out across further countries and as the Euro was coming under increased pressure, eventually something had to give. It seems Greece itself will be permitted a degree of default but that it will be strictly ring-fenced to that jurisdiction. Not convinced this will work, neither is Shane Ross.

A good break for Ireland though. Of course the interest rate cut only applies to one element of the bailout, the EFSF proportion, for all their malignment, the IMF rate was always more hospitable (c. 3%) and then there is EU / ECB funding, the latter through the backdoor into the Irish banks (which is partly what forced the bailout to be formalised in the first place) and other arrangements. I understand the bilateral agreements with UK and other countries (Sweden?) have yet to be drawn down, so the rate on those may not have been finalised yet. So the interest rate cut is only one part of a much wider pie, including many lenders and many different rates, but still a welcome development all the same. Not a panacea but sure we’ll take a Parthenon while it’s going spare.

My last post was about Brian Lenihan and the tragic echo of unfulfilled promise ala Camelot / Kennedy. The loss manifests in what might have been earlier as much as what might have been later in the sense that his time at the wheel came when the ship was already headed for the rocks.

His period at the helm of Ireland’s finances was possibly the most turbulent any Minister has had to face since independence and must have been especially so for a new Minister only in his brief a matter of weeks when the crisis hit. One cannot help but wonder what might have been had Bertie got over his own issues and recognised talent earlier, and had Brian’s undoubted ability at the cabinet table in the preceding years.

Unfortunately the period will be remembered probably for a series of fairly cataclysmic events running roughly from the guarantee up to the week the IMF landed and including the austerity budgets in between. The full story of those weeks, months, years has yet to be written and it may be many moons before we find out what really went on behind the scenes through that time, if ever. Yet some revelations have emerged into public discourse already such as in Brian’s own BBC interview and in Morgan Kelly’s recent Irish Times piece. I was surprised having coffee with some colleagues recently that these more recent revelations did not seem to have pervaded public consciousness to the extent that I might have expected.

The basic facts are clear. A guarantee was extended in 2009 to cover banking debt, this increased the national debt, along with rapid deterioration in the public finances this created twin pillars of economic and banking crises which proved insoluble in national isolation. Enter the IMF to replace the bond markets along with a programme of austerity agreed in conjunction with the EU and we are where we are.

That much, I believe is understood and uncontested. What is less clear is how, who, why the various events unfolded as they did.

The crisis in the public finances I believe could have been corrected by the austerity budgets. That particular cycle had happened before and may happen again. It was the banking crisis that really did the damage. The banking guarantee appears in hindsight to have been a mistake, yet who is to say what would have happened in the alternative, whether the banking system and perhaps the entire economy collapsed literally overnight? Could a single bank (Anglo) been allowed go to the wall, as effectively happened with Lehman brothers in the states previously. It is intuitively attractive to suggest that it could, yet it seems the prevailing argument against was really one of Euro Zone stability, rather or at least more so, than any vested local interest. Brian Lenihan in an interview for FrontLine in the early days of the crisis repeatedly stressed that no European bank had failed in the post war ear and it wouldn’t start here now. It is possible there was an element of pride in this, that Ireland would not be the one to let the side down. It is also possible and quite probable that the EU were strong arming the position and no bank would be allowed to fail without a flood of punitive consequences for the errant nation. It is also the case that despite the scornful commentary since, the weight of economic opinion at the time was divided on the issue with later critics such as McWilliams at the time calling for such a solution. In fact on the night the guarantee was voted through the Dáil, it was supported by all parties, except Labour who alone opposed. In fact, while it seems ironic now, I remember a Fine Gael friend saying to to me at the time “Labour will pay for this” (for opposing the guarauntee) . And yet one can’t help feel Labour opposed merely because they could as they grand standed on so many other issues in opposition. And of course FG swept home to a huge election victory despite having supported it.

I will return to this subject again in later posts..

On more general matters I’ve been watching events unfold on the national and European scene. Interesting if worrying that Portugal has now succumbed to an IMF bailout also. One has to wonder if parliament had held their nerve and passed their austerity budget would it have come to this. They chose to bring the house down and take their chances and will probably end up with similar if not harsher measures now anyway. Perhaps the politicians there thought if they could be seen to go down fighting they could escape an electoral bloodbath. They may just be punished now for shirking responsibility, I doubt they will escape political repercussion whatever happens.

It’s tempting to point to this and a follow-on predicted EU/IMF bailout for Spain and say Ireland wasn’t so bad, sure it’s happening across the EU. And that would be partly true. But just like the Portuguese, that doesn’t absolve the government here. Obviously the bank guarantee and other decisions will prove to have been critical along the way (although we still don’t know what the alternative would have been, even more so since the stark refusal of EU to sanction any kind of default within the community – including letting any bank fail – but I simply don’t know all the answers here, don’t think anyone does). But all that aside, what did for Fianna Fáil in the end was the attitude. Not the attitude of Fianna Fáil members up and down the country and I’ve spoken on that theme before, but I mean Fianna Fáil in government and the Ministers etc. It is simply unbelievable that in the middle of all this they saw (or at least appeared to see) nothing wrong with running for the hills with their satchels loaded. They may well have worked hard through their careers, and of course there were legal entitlements, but these were not normal times. There are senses of perspective sometimes needed and many let their party (and country) down badly. The perception projected out of government buildings right up to the end was one of business as usual with very little sense of adaptation or even awareness of a crisis. I am sure it was a hellish place to be towards the end, a bit of the Berlin bunker or Saigon rooftop about it, but it didn’t have to be that way. The Irish people are forgiving, they are understanding and with a bit of honest leadership and a real willingness to engage and a courage to lead it could have been Fianna Fáil’s finest hour. Brian Lenihan did manage to muster some of that spirit for a while but even he lost it at the end when it all just became too much talk. There are lessons to be learned from history as always. I think “Tell it straight, talk the talk but most of all walk the walk” about sums it up.

I’ve long said it is not good enough to simply want power for the simple reason of having power. You must want to do something with that power and have clear and powerful enough goals to inspire others to entrust you with it. I’ve been working on some policy ideas with a few other like mindeds but I might talk more on that another day.

For now, here are a few simple things I think the government could and should be doing if it is to recover its standing among the people.

Patently transparent and open government
I remember knocking on doors one night last Spring, in the early days of the local election canvass and meeting a friendly face. It was an aquaintance of mine, a social contact in Naas and like myself, an IT professional and a commuter, a friendly face. We talked socially and business wise for a while then moved onto brass tacks of politics and the economy. He accepted the harsh measures in recent budgets, even admired perhaps the Minister in charge, but then dropped the bombshell. “Your partys problem is corruption” he said. I was genuinely taken aback. Sure there were tough and unpopular decisions but I could defend those, and he accepted them. But there was a hangover he said. Too many on the take. For all my belief that those days were in the past, and that the days of brown envelopes were well and truly gone, there is still a huge perception amongst the public, and not unjustified, that implicit, if not explicit corruption still continues. That decisions are made and policies set according to who is in the know, if not the payroll of the corporates and developers. This notion and any suggestion of it needs to be firmly and finally addressed before the party is to recover. Perhaps there was undue influence in the past from FF friendly corporates? Whether it did or didn’t happen before, it cannot, or even a perception of it cannot be allowed to happen today. Decisions must be made openly and transparently with full rationale. If they are unpopular we will take the hit.  If they win favour we will take the plaudits. But we can champion them without compromise knowing they are there for all the right reasons.

Zero Tolerance for Carpetbaggers
On a related theme we have scored, or allowed to be scored, more own goals against the party than the opposition have ever placed in the net. Perhaps naievely I really believed the day of free loaders in Fianna Fáil had gone. It may not be as overt now with no bank drafts or brown envelopes changing hands, but loans from Fingleton or expense scams are a sordid modern equivalent. This kind of sqaulour should be rewarded with an absolute zero tolerance policy and offenders turfed out upon their ear to face the full rigour of the law or the corú as appropriate. Those that betray the public or the party trust should be treated accordingly.

At least some application of moral hazard
Though many accept the need for some form of banking rescue, what has really grated is the apparent dichotomony betwen little and large. The householder in negative equity whilst the bank is being bailed out. Whilst I believe this to be a simplistic and not entirely accurate picture I hold a view that those who make a decision should be culpable for it, beit the householder or the bondholder. If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime and the same should apply to lenders, big and small. I am familiar with the concept of ‘too big to fail’ and I am aware every western democracy bar Canada has seen banking support schemes of some nature but I am deeply uncomfortable with the absence of moral hazard. I believe those that take risks must stand to gain from them but the converse must also hold true. We need to see at least some form of moral hazard being applied to those at the top as well as at the bottom of the pile.

Internal review and democracy
The party needs to look to its structures for internal reform and policy development. It grated many, many members that the Green grass roots got more say in the Programme for Government than many of our backbench TDs did. This is wrong and is not the way to run a modern political party. And it is not the way to attract and retain the membership needed for what could and should be a team of all the talents. There are great people in the organisation already. We need to function as a whole greater than the sum of the parts.

Communicate and explain decisions
Policies need to be sold as well as made. Talk to the people. Communicate. Explain what is being done, why it is being done, how it is being done. And do so in a language people will understand. The Taoiseach has got better at this recently and I would have expected some upswing on the strength of it. He was good on PrimeTime last night and I think he should keep doing this and more of it, and get the rest of the cabinet out to bat also.

Review of Anglo
Probably the most toxic decision of the last twenty four months has been the horrendous sums to be ploughed into Anglo, a bank that even its supporters feel can have at best limited shelf life with perhaps a remant hiving off into a form of corporate credit union. NAMA, I can accept, the figures can even add up, but twenty plus billions into Anglo is a hell of a price to pay for sovereign reputation. I’m not an economist, I’m not a financier (notwithstanding an M.Sc. in financial maths) and I don’t claim to have all the answers. Unlike many commentators perhaps, when the Minister says something, I believe it unreservedly, so I trust him on this also. But I am concerned when so many commentators, academics and what appears to be informed opinions are positioned against this, to ask is there really no other way? A clear succcint and final explanation or even better, an honest and open review of this would help dispel a lot of the really bad karma that surrounds this right now.

Northern mobilisation
For many this may not be an issue, may not even be on the radar. But it matters to me. It’s partly why I was attracted to the party, as the leader of nationalist opinion on the island. We have members enlisted in the North. We have cumann established and eager to get going. We have had expressions of interest from sitting representatives. We have some fine young activists really pushing this hard. And still we are not there. Why the inertia, why can we not put our money where our mouth is on this one and mobilse for real in thirty two counties. Shockwave  – we might lose elections. Well we’re not going to win any with no candidates.

Rant over. I do broadly agree with most govt policies but there are some that rankle, and the political presentation at times rankles even more. Deal with the offenders, listen to own membership, re earn the trust of the people and return to greatness once more.

Build that shining city on that hill. And let the beacon light a way where now there appears none…

Similar claims had also been made in local media at the outset, example here:
02 December 2009  Leinster Leader – http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/Counting-the-cost-of-the.5876640.jp

Thankfully the local debate has moved on in light of technical investigation and informed commentary from residents and engineers, however the prime time remarks represented a setback.

I spoke to Deputy Michael Fitzpatrick about this after the program and he raised the issue in the Oireachtas this week as follows:

Deputy Michael Fitzpatrick: I shall be brief. I shall mention one or two matters in relation to the flooding and move on to more recent events. There was not that much flooding in Kildare, but nonetheless it was very severe. Some of this was caused by the Liffey, as I mentioned earlier, and the way in which it is managed. We need to examine carefully how the Liffey is managed, because while it is flooding in Clane, it then starts to move down to the Strawberry Beds in Dublin, so there is a whole ripple effect.

Perhaps I can ask Mr. Dowling about the Waterways in Sallins. It was flooded very badly, mainly because of blocked drains and outlets. It would not have been flooded at all if proper maintenance had been done before the event. In a recent television comment, the Minister made reference to the Waterways and said the name indicated the development had been built on a flood plain. I have known this area for many years and it was not built on a flood plain, but rather on what was formerly a pitch and putt course, in a strategic location close to the railway station. It got its name from the Grand Canal which runs through the village and the promotional literature when the development was being sold highlighted the canal as a very special amenity, which it is. Comments such as that are very severe on the people now living in those houses, if they want to sell a house in the Waterways since the Minister has indicated it was built on a flood plain. The position needs to be clarified in the public arena about this particular estate. I appeal to the officials and indeed, the Minister, to clearly state that this enormous estate which contains all the infrastructure needed for a proper development, is not built on a flood plain.

Deputy Michael Fitzpatrick: I have one more question for Mr. Dowling, whose answer he may communicate to the committee later. I made a comment earlier about waterways in Sallins. A statement was made by the Minister on television which has the potential to devalue properties in the area substantially and many people are under stress due to this. Most of them are in negative equity at the moment and if his comments stood up, it would be serious for them.

Chairman: I will assist the Deputy. He has raised the matter and the committee will write to the Minister in this regard. We will try to obtain a transcript of the Minister’s comments. I saw the broadcast myself and I remember a certain phrase he used about the name of the estate, but I did not think of the consequences for the estate. We will obtain a transcript and ask the Minister to clarify his comments. We will write to the Minister rather than ask Mr. Dowling.

The full transcript can be seen here.

http://www.irishelection.com/2010/01/highs-and-lows-2009/

Quite a few comments and discussion if you want to drop by there.

Some highs:

-

• Budget 2010. Whilst I accept this was difficult to swallow for many and my own household (being 50% public sector) was not spared, I rank this as a high as it was an example of the government displaying leadership, decisiveness and a conviction that this would and could be solved and not put indefinitely on the long finger for any politically expedient reasons. Standing up to the unions was also a plus for me as was the fact that the FF backbenchers found voice on something other than drink driving. It also confirmed the upwards trajectory of our Finance Minister, Brian Lenihan TD as the ace in the pack and a bulwark against further government descent. A good day for party and for the country.
• Going North. A little trumpeted but steadily progressing initiative of 2009. Buoyed in no inconsiderable part by the efforts and encouragement of the Ógra movement (who allowed northern voting delegates at youth conference in 09) , the senior Fianna Fáil party organised, held recruitment events and public fori in three Northern counties in the latter half of 2009. Progress was not rapid but steady rather than slow. It is happening and for many of us it is a most welcome development. I always believed in a thirty two county republican party and am delighted to be reassured many others in the movement think likewise. Lets push on for the assembly elections next year and take the opportunity to get a foothold both sides of the border. Towards 2016 indeed.
• Yes to Lisbon. Perhaps not very sexy, but yet very important for the advancement of the greater European project.  A raft of organisational and procedural changes and some important common ground enablers to compete with the big blocs internationally and Continentally on climate change, security, defence etc.  A long slog, longer than anyone expected when it started in 2004 but welcome closure nonetheless…

-

Some lows:

-

• Oireachtas Expenses Scandal The whole thing was an ignominious stain on the body politic. Whilst our former Ceann Comhairle friend, JOD seems to have been the worst, or at least the most prolific, the exorbitance seems to have been shared by many, including opposition parties when on their various junkets. And of course all expenses were signed off by cross party committee.  Which helps explain the reticence by any the Leinster house club members on any side the house to really tackle this until things came to a head via the media and public reaction.  Also whilst only the excesses were highlighted, the many legitimate expenses claimed are subsumed into the mix with the result that even legitimate expenses become  regarded as carpet bagging. The Minister has twice asked for a review of the system and it is needed for all purposes, to expose abuses but also to safeguard the legitimate uses of the system.
• Banking Crisis The whole problem here is that wrong doing or at least a highly cavalier attitudes appear to have incurred no subsequent penalty, be it financial, legal or career wise. Sure some the big guns shuffled off the deck but not without some nice linings to their pockets as a result. The ‘moral hazard’ argument appeared to go out the window particularly with regard to the banks when it became clear some were ‘too big to fail’ but not in fact ‘too big to bail’. This is the ultimate quandary for a mixed economy, do the rules of extreme capitalism apply (where darwinism prevades and the bigger they come the harder they fall) or does the state pick up the tab to avoid massive job losses and potentially crippling wider economic and social affects. Obama had to do it with the automotive industry and we had to do it with the banks. While the government may have had no other choice,  it does leave a sour taste and we must still see heads roll in 2010 if this sector is to restore confidence.
• Local Elections This was a real black spot. For me personally it was a very gruelling outcome, having campaigned officially for almost a year, and been involved in local activism for a lot longer it was and is frustrating to accept that, for the next few years at least, I can play no formal role in local affairs. The many things I wanted to do must all take a back seat as I have no formal platform with which to address them.  Whilst I accept the feedback from many people that it was a political not a personal issue, it doesn’t change the result. Also had it been locally political, I think the case stacked up very well, unfortunately we were condemned by the economic tsunami and the wider political malaise. A party colleague in another district, who has contested both general and local elections, recalled ruefully afterwards, how when he ran in the generals (when things were good nationally) he was cursed on local issues, and when he ran locally (when as a sitting Cllr he had a solid record on local issues) he was cursed on the basis of national politics! Looking at the wider political situation, one of the difficulties for the Fianna Fáil party is that so few of the ‘next generation’  young bloods were elected in this election, as where survivors did emerge it was generally the old dog for the long road, based usually on decades of graft and local relationship building. Full credit to them, but the imbalance will make it harder for the party to renew or regenerate internally, or to introduce any new blood/ideas, which ironically is what the electorate said was what was most needed. Well unfortunately it is on hold now for another five years at least.

I will likely add a few more items here over the next day or so but am publishing this now to get started.

There was going to be a challenge from the start in rallying public support for a mass campaign of protest and unrest, as the anger of earlier months had begun, in many quarters at least, to morph into a kind of bitter acceptance and grim reality.

Whatever the ghosts of the past, the ghost of times present needed to dole out the harshest medicine if we were to dream of seeing the ghost of times future at all. As Bord Snip author, McCarthy himself, opined so succintly, “the government hasn’t run out of compassion, it’s run out of money”. With almost eighty percent of public spending divided almost evenly between public sector wage bill and welfare payments, and four billion in savings to be found, well something had to give.

So for the unions it was always a delicate course to steer a populist earlier anger into a cohesive and longer lasting chorus of dissent. And more importantly to bring to bear a real, actual influence on events by proposing tangible alternative solutions. We saw in the NAMA debate how naysayers became derailed through too broad a coalition of interests and most damningly lack of a credible alternative.

It seems what hope the good ship union had of navigating the storm has now been fatally becalmed by various utterances and admissions of the past few days. Last night’s RTE FrontLine witnessed a truly cringeworthy performance from SIPTU’s Jack O’Conor where he bluffed and blustered and became quite belligerent at times, whilst it became apparent he had no real plan, ace or even jack (excuse the pun) up his sleeve to provide alternate means of addressing the acknowledged shortfalls. It is common place to hear politicians weave around the question and offer platitudes in place of plain speaking but Mr. O’Conor acted as though he was on a pub bar stool and not on a national TV show with a co panel, live audience and hundreds thousands more at home. Despite a growing petulance and repeated protestations to “listen to what he was saying” noone in fact seemed anywhere near the wiser when he was finished.

The chestnut again of who exactly are “the most vulnerable in society” saw some cold figures poured over it as a (welcome new face) tax lawyer ‘did the math’ outlining how a 75% tax rate on couples jointly assessed at €75,000 combined income would be the reality of an enforced effort to secure the required savings in taxation measures alone. The much loved but sadly vapid solution “Tax the rich” really depends on who the rich are. When one man’s “rich” turn out to be another man’s “vulnerable” then we really have gone full circle and we begin to run out of grass. There just aren’t enough “really rich” people left in the country to go around. What loopholes remained have largely been closed already whilst the demise of the celtic tiger has largely put paid to many of the rest. To make it worthwhile any taxation measures would have to apply at a level that massively disincentives labour and has a possibly far more putative effect on the self same masses than a public pay cut would lead to in the first place.

Peter McLoone appears to privately concede reality in this morning’s leaked memo, when despite his colleague O’Connors obfuscation, it transpires that reducing the public pay bill really is a simple question of cutting jobs or cutting pay.

The Unions really are on rocky shores also with the “not our fault” mantra having had a seat at the top table right through the boom years. They often appeared to exert more influence than many back benchers and at the height of it even first mate McCreevy was dispatched to Brussels as not profligate enough for the required ’social justice’ creed that partnership sought at high tide.

But after too many late night’s supping rum at the captain’s table, it is time to shrug off the hangover and grab an oar like everyone else. A rising tide lifted all boats once but now it is time to pull together or face the ocean floor alone.

(This article also appears under my contributions at IrishElection.com)

The Greens’ demands for their new deal are carried in the Irish Times today. Personally I hope both parties can broker a deal as I would like the current government to continue. The nightmare scenario as I see it (from an admittedly political perspective) is where the greens present impossible demands and the government falls because FF can’t grant them. Then FG / Lab proceed to do almost identical things to the last administration but with greater public support and when the inevitable recovery comes in 2012 or 13 claim all the credit. Meanwhile FF are forever the bad guys who caused the recesssion and wouldn’t even give the greens their wooly but worthy demands. In that case it really would be a case of good riddance even if they (GP) did have the time of their lives.

Quickly reviewing each point of the wishlist.

1.A reversal of recent education cuts
This is fine in theory but may just be mathematically impossible. It’s not FF policy to cut education, it’s a matter of financial survival of the state.

2. A reduction in the number of TDs
Perhaps but along with a reform of the function. Representatives (which institutionalises clientelism) or legislators?

3. Major changes in the electoral system
More power to local authorities? Agree. Shorter terms of government and councils. Agree. Greater powers? Good idea but within reason. The Californian state has nearly gone bust because when they granted people free choice they chose to be taxed liked libertarians whilst enjoying communist levels of public services..

4. A commitment to a single-tier universal health system
Agree with existing commercial insurers providing a private compliment to public provision but without the overlap. Bit like what Obama is trying to do in the States.

5. A new third rate of income tax
Probably makes sense. There are already three levels of levy. We should consider an advanced model like the Canadian system. It’s like a tax ladder with gradual incrememnts in tax when your earnings increase.

6. The abolition of the PRSI ceiling
Makes total sense.

7. The integration of the income levies with the tax rates
it’s a no brainer. It’s happening anyway. The Minister always said the levies were only a blunt instrument until the next budget could regularise things. But it allows greens claim a ‘win’ from the off.

8. A clampdown on tax exiles.
Agree. But isn’t this what we are doing already? We need clarity on what the Greens consider a tax exile.

9. An animal welfare Bill that would ban hare coursing, stag hunting, fur farming and the importation of wild animals to be used in circuses
Agreed on most the above. Definitely a lot to be done on animal welfare, controls, rehousing, kill rates, regulations and monitoring. It’s not all black and white though. Devil in the detail. I’m not a hunter but I like to cast a fly as well as the next man. And I’ve been known to grace the odd point to point. Lets balance the traditions of rural Ireland with the need for protections.

10. Basic social welfare entitlements should not be cut
Well it depends. Who are the ‘vulnerable’ these days? Employers get no ‘stamps’ allowance. What about the one who can’t pay his staff or the loan on his warehouse? Or the employee with a mortgage and bills on the table but no benefits. Better or worse off than those with gauraunteed tax free income (which has risen despite deflation). Or the millionaire with a medical card and / or child benefit. I know who’s going to be first in the queue for the doctors when the child gets sick and who will hesitate until its desperate.
We need safety nets sure but the current system needs fairness and reform on all sides.

11. Overseas development aid should not be cut
Worthy principle but needs must. We can only send what we can afford. Also, we send the Irish army abroad every year who protect hundreds of thousands of refugees. That’s worth millions in development aid.

12. A massive shift of emphasis from investment in road building to public transport initiatives
We need both. Ireland has seen vast improvements with the road building program of recent years. As a public transport activist I have many views on the railway and bus program also. If at all possible, capital investment on the T21 and other projects must be maintained.

I was in discussion last night (mainly via twitter) on social justice. Reflected bit more today. Is an oft abused term. Most mean by it a desire to protect those of lower means or protection. Which is what I generally mean by it as well. However taken literally justice would actually be quite a (classical) right wing concept. Biblican justice suggests an eye for an eye, and an economic version of social justice could suggest for example that noone is entitled to additional protection, in fact quite a darwininst model could emerge using pure ‘justice’ ideals. Is the welfare state a ‘just’ society? Why is it ‘just’ that someone gets money for nothing?! Alernately is it ‘just’ for another to inherit wealth not having earned it themselves. Would the ultimate ‘just’ society see everyone levelled at entry (age of adulthood) and allow everyone make of life what they will. No silver spoons but no safety nets either. I guess that would be real social justice.

Anyhow, after six months at the coalface I’m heading for some downtime. Not even sure if I’ll have an internet connection next week.. But my blackberry will still be on, so if you want to, comment away!