How many U-turns can a Government make in one week?
Well, I'm counting 5 at the moment.
1) 'Pay-as-you-throw' bin collection. Is the plan in or out? In? More like a smelly okey cokey to me.
2) 5% of surpluses on school budgets being reclaimed by the Government. The money is now to be left to the schools. Hurrah!
3) 800,000 immigrants figures, then 1.1 million. Who knows?
4) 30% of new jobs going to immigrants, then 40%, maybe even 52%? Again, who knows?
5) Capital Gains Tax may now have £100,000 retirement allowance, to offset the uproar from the business community at the Chancellor's CGT plans in the CSR.
It's only early on a Wednesday, I wonder how many by the end of the week. If it gets to ten, I may be tempted to treat myself to a dark chocolate Toblerone.
This isn't a Government, more like a bad driving school.
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 31 October 2007
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
Gordon Brown critique
Michael Gove, the Shadow Schools Secretary, has delivered a fantastic speech about the first four months of Gordon Brown's premiership. Obviously it is partisan, but well thought out and he has spotted the trends that typify Gordon Brown's career so far. Read it HERE.
Squiffy.
Squiffy.
David Cameron's immigration speech
I'm quite a fan of David Cameron and I thought that yesterday's speech on immigration was well thought out, well argued and thought provoking. I find it impressive that a modern politician can make an engaging speech which talks about an issue without the quick sound bites that we're used to.
It was DC's first speech on immigration since becoming leader and I'm glad that he took his time to think about the implications to the entire apparatus of Government of immigration policy. We've grown so used to politicians implying either 'send them home' or 'it's racist to discuss immigration' and it is easy to get the idea that politicians will pander to voters prejudices. So to hear someone arguing about the issue in the round is refreshing.
What a contrast to Liam Byrne, immigration minister, on Newsnight last night. He talked about the fine words but lack of policies. It takes time to come up with a selection of coherent policies (not just one headline grabbing one) to tackle complicated issues, and Labour recently haven't shown that they have any of their own. I believe their points-based system was an old Tory one from years ago, so more pinching of Tory clothes then?
Squiffy.
It was DC's first speech on immigration since becoming leader and I'm glad that he took his time to think about the implications to the entire apparatus of Government of immigration policy. We've grown so used to politicians implying either 'send them home' or 'it's racist to discuss immigration' and it is easy to get the idea that politicians will pander to voters prejudices. So to hear someone arguing about the issue in the round is refreshing.
What a contrast to Liam Byrne, immigration minister, on Newsnight last night. He talked about the fine words but lack of policies. It takes time to come up with a selection of coherent policies (not just one headline grabbing one) to tackle complicated issues, and Labour recently haven't shown that they have any of their own. I believe their points-based system was an old Tory one from years ago, so more pinching of Tory clothes then?
Squiffy.
Return of the bins?
Last week's news that the idea of taxing people for how much rubbish they use had been binned now seem premature. This week the idea is back again.
The idea has been parcelled up into the new climate change bill which will allow authorities the option of using a 'pay-as-you-throw' tax. I quite like the idea if there is a rebate for those that recycle, but I don't think many councils will introduce the proposals unless they can guarantee that they will make serious gains from the tax.
If the costs to administer the scheme (which will including training up the bin men, using new technology to weigh the waste, a new database, a new billing system, chasing up those that don't cough up and the costs of dealing with increased fly-tipping) are higher than the money they make from it, there will be little incentive for the councils to play along.
Unless the councils get together to share the costs then I can't see it happening and it will end up being another high profile gimmick from the Government!
Squiffy.
The idea has been parcelled up into the new climate change bill which will allow authorities the option of using a 'pay-as-you-throw' tax. I quite like the idea if there is a rebate for those that recycle, but I don't think many councils will introduce the proposals unless they can guarantee that they will make serious gains from the tax.
If the costs to administer the scheme (which will including training up the bin men, using new technology to weigh the waste, a new database, a new billing system, chasing up those that don't cough up and the costs of dealing with increased fly-tipping) are higher than the money they make from it, there will be little incentive for the councils to play along.
Unless the councils get together to share the costs then I can't see it happening and it will end up being another high profile gimmick from the Government!
Squiffy.
Monday, 29 October 2007
Personalised carbon trading
After thinking about ways to reduce CO2 emissions, I think I've come to embrace the idea of personalised carbon trading. This has been advertised by other environmentalists, and I think it could work even though it would be technically very difficult.
The idea is that each person in the UK has an allotted annual (or maybe quarterly) CO2 limit. They each have their own CO2 number on something like a credit card. When the person pays an energy bill, buys petrol or train and airline tickets their card is charged the appropriate CO2 emission count. At the end of the annual or quarterly period, the person has to pay extra tax for any CO2 emissions above the limit. If the person is under their limit they earn a rebate.
The fees should hit people who use a lot of CO2 and pay those that use less. At the end of each period the bill will be a visual reminder of how much CO2 costs, and should be an incentive to change behaviour.
I would also like to see this extended to companies, and not just to those companies already in the carbon trading scheme. Companies I have worked in quite often use a lot of energy leaving lights and computers on, and putting staff on flights at the drop of a hat when video conferencing would work just as well.
Now that would be radical.
Squiffy.
The idea is that each person in the UK has an allotted annual (or maybe quarterly) CO2 limit. They each have their own CO2 number on something like a credit card. When the person pays an energy bill, buys petrol or train and airline tickets their card is charged the appropriate CO2 emission count. At the end of the annual or quarterly period, the person has to pay extra tax for any CO2 emissions above the limit. If the person is under their limit they earn a rebate.
The fees should hit people who use a lot of CO2 and pay those that use less. At the end of each period the bill will be a visual reminder of how much CO2 costs, and should be an incentive to change behaviour.
I would also like to see this extended to companies, and not just to those companies already in the carbon trading scheme. Companies I have worked in quite often use a lot of energy leaving lights and computers on, and putting staff on flights at the drop of a hat when video conferencing would work just as well.
Now that would be radical.
Squiffy.
Where's the manners?
Travelling by tube this evening I found myself infuriated (I often am) by passengers trying to get on the tube at a station before letting people off first.
Why do they do it? Probably to try to get a seat before anyone else. And yes, it is tempting, but good manners stop me. Maybe empty seats should be electrified until everyone getting off the train are on the platform. Technically impossible, but I'd love to see it.
Rant over.
Squiffy.
Why do they do it? Probably to try to get a seat before anyone else. And yes, it is tempting, but good manners stop me. Maybe empty seats should be electrified until everyone getting off the train are on the platform. Technically impossible, but I'd love to see it.
Rant over.
Squiffy.
English votes (part 2)
With a resigned ear, I heard the obvious protestations from Labour MPs about Malcolm Rifkind's plan for an English Grand Committee of only English MPs voting on English matters. It was to be expected that out would trot the 'This will lead to the break up of the UK' arguments. I'm not saying that it isn't true, it very well may lead to the break up of the UK.
This Government has systematically changed the constitution and put in half-thought out plans without looking for far reaching consequences. The English Grand Committee or an English Parliament was the natural consequence of devolution, and to deny that is to deny common sense. The electorate will look at the unfairness of the current system and want an answer. So as I said in my previous post, once the genie is out of the bottle it's hard to put it back in.
Maybe it is time to rethink the post devolution settlement. Several options exist which would provide fairness to the whole UK. One option would be to revert to the pre-devolution UK, although I don't think this would be acceptable now. Another would be to have five parliaments, Scottish, English, Welsh, N. Irish and the UK parliament. Finally, we could abolish the Scottish Parliament and Welsh assembly and have four Grand Committees using the current MPs to vote on matters regarding their constituency.
This matter will need resolving one way or another.
Squiffy.
This Government has systematically changed the constitution and put in half-thought out plans without looking for far reaching consequences. The English Grand Committee or an English Parliament was the natural consequence of devolution, and to deny that is to deny common sense. The electorate will look at the unfairness of the current system and want an answer. So as I said in my previous post, once the genie is out of the bottle it's hard to put it back in.
Maybe it is time to rethink the post devolution settlement. Several options exist which would provide fairness to the whole UK. One option would be to revert to the pre-devolution UK, although I don't think this would be acceptable now. Another would be to have five parliaments, Scottish, English, Welsh, N. Irish and the UK parliament. Finally, we could abolish the Scottish Parliament and Welsh assembly and have four Grand Committees using the current MPs to vote on matters regarding their constituency.
This matter will need resolving one way or another.
Squiffy.
Sunday, 28 October 2007
Will GB's PMQs get better?
An article in today's Sunday Times reports that there will be changes in the way Gordon Brown is briefed in preparation for the weekly PMQs.
I don't believe the problem is with the briefing notes, he can and does use all the statistics available to him. He does not seem to have the capacity to turn difficult questions into a Prime Ministerial response, this was a skill that Tony Blair used to great effect. With humour and some self deprecation he could bat away a question to irk the leader of the opposition. GB simply gets angry, stutters and then falls over himself. Even his jokes fall flat, they seem too pre-prepared, and the stuttering to get them out spoil the punchline.
We'll see a week on Wednesday whether there is any improvement, but don't hold your breath.
Squiffy.
I don't believe the problem is with the briefing notes, he can and does use all the statistics available to him. He does not seem to have the capacity to turn difficult questions into a Prime Ministerial response, this was a skill that Tony Blair used to great effect. With humour and some self deprecation he could bat away a question to irk the leader of the opposition. GB simply gets angry, stutters and then falls over himself. Even his jokes fall flat, they seem too pre-prepared, and the stuttering to get them out spoil the punchline.
We'll see a week on Wednesday whether there is any improvement, but don't hold your breath.
Squiffy.
McLaren's hearing date has been set
The 2007 Formula 1 season will have a last throw of the dice on 15th November. Not on the track but, to follow the pattern of the year, in the FIA court.
After the Brazilian Grand Prix, both the Williams and BMW cars were found to have been running fuel outside the permitted temperature. The fuel entered the cars lower than the permitted ten degrees Celsius lower than the ambient temperature at the fuel stops. This allows for faster refuelling and a 5 to 10 BHP engine boost for a few laps.
The Williams and BMW teams argued that there are two sources of information of the ambient temperature, the FIA timing screens and the French Meteorological office which provides weather readings for viewers. These differ from time to time and the Meteorological office readings were higher than the time screens. The teams also argued that the temperature would be higher by the time the fuel entered the car. The stewards at the race agreed with the uncertainty and back Williamsddd and BMW.
I understand that McLaren will show that advice from the FIA earlier in the year stated that the FIA timing screens are used as the basis for the ambient temperature readings. Also there is an FIA thermometer on each fuel rig to monitor the fuel temperature to police this regulation.
It appears to me that Williams and BMW do not have a leg to stand on. If their cars are thrown out of the Brazilian result, in theory, Lewis Hamilton will be promoted to fourth and the winner of the driver's World Championship. However, I find it hard to believe that the FIA will allow Lewis to be champion after the event. They may only discard the constructors points or choose to keep Lewis in seventh place. Given the FIA's perceived bias towards Ferrari, this would seem the likely outcome, even if it seems unfair.
The time has come to change some of the regulators of F1. I think Max Mosley should resign as he can no longer provide any confidence of equanimity of treatment of the teams when problems arise. Incidentally, he should resign anyway for his outrageous remarks regarding Sir Jackie Stewart. Also, it is time to have professional stewards at each race who can provide consistent rulings during and post race.
How about Eddie Jordan as FIA president?
Squiffy.
After the Brazilian Grand Prix, both the Williams and BMW cars were found to have been running fuel outside the permitted temperature. The fuel entered the cars lower than the permitted ten degrees Celsius lower than the ambient temperature at the fuel stops. This allows for faster refuelling and a 5 to 10 BHP engine boost for a few laps.
The Williams and BMW teams argued that there are two sources of information of the ambient temperature, the FIA timing screens and the French Meteorological office which provides weather readings for viewers. These differ from time to time and the Meteorological office readings were higher than the time screens. The teams also argued that the temperature would be higher by the time the fuel entered the car. The stewards at the race agreed with the uncertainty and back Williamsddd and BMW.
I understand that McLaren will show that advice from the FIA earlier in the year stated that the FIA timing screens are used as the basis for the ambient temperature readings. Also there is an FIA thermometer on each fuel rig to monitor the fuel temperature to police this regulation.
It appears to me that Williams and BMW do not have a leg to stand on. If their cars are thrown out of the Brazilian result, in theory, Lewis Hamilton will be promoted to fourth and the winner of the driver's World Championship. However, I find it hard to believe that the FIA will allow Lewis to be champion after the event. They may only discard the constructors points or choose to keep Lewis in seventh place. Given the FIA's perceived bias towards Ferrari, this would seem the likely outcome, even if it seems unfair.
The time has come to change some of the regulators of F1. I think Max Mosley should resign as he can no longer provide any confidence of equanimity of treatment of the teams when problems arise. Incidentally, he should resign anyway for his outrageous remarks regarding Sir Jackie Stewart. Also, it is time to have professional stewards at each race who can provide consistent rulings during and post race.
How about Eddie Jordan as FIA president?
Squiffy.
English votes for English M.P.s?
Having just watched Harriet Harman voicing opposition to the possible Tory plan of excluding Scottish MPs from English only matters, I started wondering why Labour are so against it. It is, in some sense, a natural conclusion to devolution. Maybe conclusion is the wrong word, for a possible endpoint is independence for Scotland.
Is it possible that Labour can now foresee the break up of the United Kingdom? Devolution was supposed to stop the pressure for independence. But after two terms in office north of the border, the SNP are now in power and will try at every point to create friction with Westminster. It seems to be working in some respects, a new poll states that 33% of English people support independence for Scotland, maybe not the electorate the SNP were targeting but it will still help their cause.
Or is it possible that Labour can foresee that, as a Government, they will not be able to enact much of their legislation without co-operation from the English Grand Committee. Without the many Scottish Labour MPs, they may find it hard to have a majority in an English Grand Committee.
Either proposition is unattractive for Labour. They face an uphill struggle to gain a majority in a Scotland-less UK, or become an impotent domestic Government in a UK with a probably Tory dominated English only grand committee.
If I was Gordon Brown, I would persuade the Labour Scottish MSPs to vote for a referendum on Scottish independence. The outcome would, at present, likely be a No vote which would take independence off the agenda for thirty years or so. This would give me some breathing space to find some imaginative plan to fend of the English only plan for votes. Once this genie is out of the bottle it may be very hard to put it back in again!
Squiffy.
Is it possible that Labour can now foresee the break up of the United Kingdom? Devolution was supposed to stop the pressure for independence. But after two terms in office north of the border, the SNP are now in power and will try at every point to create friction with Westminster. It seems to be working in some respects, a new poll states that 33% of English people support independence for Scotland, maybe not the electorate the SNP were targeting but it will still help their cause.
Or is it possible that Labour can foresee that, as a Government, they will not be able to enact much of their legislation without co-operation from the English Grand Committee. Without the many Scottish Labour MPs, they may find it hard to have a majority in an English Grand Committee.
Either proposition is unattractive for Labour. They face an uphill struggle to gain a majority in a Scotland-less UK, or become an impotent domestic Government in a UK with a probably Tory dominated English only grand committee.
If I was Gordon Brown, I would persuade the Labour Scottish MSPs to vote for a referendum on Scottish independence. The outcome would, at present, likely be a No vote which would take independence off the agenda for thirty years or so. This would give me some breathing space to find some imaginative plan to fend of the English only plan for votes. Once this genie is out of the bottle it may be very hard to put it back in again!
Squiffy.
Friday, 26 October 2007
On the hard shoulder
The Government has announced that they will be expanding their plans to allow drivers to use the hard shoulder as an extra lane on some motorways. Ten years on from John Prescott's promise to resign if he hadn't reduced car usage in a decade, which he then abruptly forgot about, using the hard shoulder seems to be the only plan in town.
Is this Gordon Brown's new vision? More cars, reduced bus usage (apart from Scotland and London) and expensive trains. Oh well!
Watching the Daily Politics on Thursday commenting on the new plan, transport minister Tom Harris mentioned 'Active Traffic Management' roughly once in every sentence. Apparently, this is traffic cameras (not more cameras) keeping a beady eye on traffic levels and changing speed limits automatically. It may even help for a few years.
Mr Harris seemed to be in some difficulty in the interview over tolls roads, though, which made me think of 'Active Minister Management'. When one minister slows down or breaks down even, the Government could wield another minister at a moments notice, a kind of ministerial substitution bench. Let's not have an extra time though!
Squiffy.
Is this Gordon Brown's new vision? More cars, reduced bus usage (apart from Scotland and London) and expensive trains. Oh well!
Watching the Daily Politics on Thursday commenting on the new plan, transport minister Tom Harris mentioned 'Active Traffic Management' roughly once in every sentence. Apparently, this is traffic cameras (not more cameras) keeping a beady eye on traffic levels and changing speed limits automatically. It may even help for a few years.
Mr Harris seemed to be in some difficulty in the interview over tolls roads, though, which made me think of 'Active Minister Management'. When one minister slows down or breaks down even, the Government could wield another minister at a moments notice, a kind of ministerial substitution bench. Let's not have an extra time though!
Squiffy.
Could Alex scupper Gordy's day?
The ink is not yet dry on the EU constitution reform treaty and parliamentary approval has not yet begun, but could Alex Salmond be about to throw a spanner in the works?
The SNP are holding their conference in Aviemore and may decide to hold their own referendum on the treaty. They are unhappy about control over fisheries become an 'Exclusive Competence' of the EU. Competence being a strange word to use when talking about the Common Fisheries Policy.
For the SNP this is one of their 'red lines' and is one of the areas which were devolved to the Scottish Parliament in the original devolution act. So will they decide to go for a referendum? I suspect they will, and not only to protect Scottish fishermen. It will be another popular position they can take and create another fissure along the Scotland/England union. (Forgetting, of course, the SNP's enthusiasm for the EU project as a whole).
If they do go for a referendum the likelihood will be that they will win it. Where will this leave the treaty and devolution? GB could try to ignore it, or he may feel compelled to go for a full UK referendum. Maybe this could end up in the courts (which court though?).
Interesting times ahead.
Squiffy.
The SNP are holding their conference in Aviemore and may decide to hold their own referendum on the treaty. They are unhappy about control over fisheries become an 'Exclusive Competence' of the EU. Competence being a strange word to use when talking about the Common Fisheries Policy.
For the SNP this is one of their 'red lines' and is one of the areas which were devolved to the Scottish Parliament in the original devolution act. So will they decide to go for a referendum? I suspect they will, and not only to protect Scottish fishermen. It will be another popular position they can take and create another fissure along the Scotland/England union. (Forgetting, of course, the SNP's enthusiasm for the EU project as a whole).
If they do go for a referendum the likelihood will be that they will win it. Where will this leave the treaty and devolution? GB could try to ignore it, or he may feel compelled to go for a full UK referendum. Maybe this could end up in the courts (which court though?).
Interesting times ahead.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 25 October 2007
Bin plans rubbished
Apparently the plan to tax how much we throw away and not recycle has been thrown out after a late intervention from Number 10. I wonder why, David Miliband as Environment Secretary was very keen.
Could it be that Gordon Brown heard from the 5 Citizen Juries (which have incidentally cost over £400,000 of taxpayers money so far) that the plan was unpopular? I would actually be in favour of the plan if it could be guaranteed that council tax was reduced by the same amount as the average 'rubbish tax', but I wonder if people are now suspicious that the tax would be used as another stealth tax designed to push up local council revenue.
It's interesting to note that one of GB's first plans was to set up the citizen juries, which sound to me like glorified focus groups and should probably be funded by the Labour Party itself. Is this the new direction? The new vision? Wasn't Tony Blair's first term decided by the opinions of focus groups?
How times change.
Squiffy.
Could it be that Gordon Brown heard from the 5 Citizen Juries (which have incidentally cost over £400,000 of taxpayers money so far) that the plan was unpopular? I would actually be in favour of the plan if it could be guaranteed that council tax was reduced by the same amount as the average 'rubbish tax', but I wonder if people are now suspicious that the tax would be used as another stealth tax designed to push up local council revenue.
It's interesting to note that one of GB's first plans was to set up the citizen juries, which sound to me like glorified focus groups and should probably be funded by the Labour Party itself. Is this the new direction? The new vision? Wasn't Tony Blair's first term decided by the opinions of focus groups?
How times change.
Squiffy.
Gordon Brown's performances at PMQs
Iain Dale has written an excellent article on Gordon Brown's performance at PMQs these last three weeks HERE.
Squiffy.
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 24 October 2007
Brown on the ropes
Today's PMQs show just how much Gordon Brown is on the ropes. For three weeks running David Cameron has plastered GB all around the House.
During DC's first three questions regarding the Government's plans to recoup five percent of schools surpluses, twice GB made reference to the fact that the schools would not have a surplus had it not been for the Government's generosity. How condescending.
Schools are given a budget and (hopefully) try to live in their means, if there are some plans for a big project then they would naturally keep some of the money back each year to plan ahead. But GB thinks he knows better and can take the money back 'for the good of the children' and for who knows what. What are the incentives for schools to plan wisely? None, if this continues we'll see annual deficits in school budgets.
DC's second set of questions were designed to get at GB via Douglas Alexander and the fiasco of this year's Scottish elections. This is Dougie's second public cock-up recently after the failure of GB to call an election. Will a third mistake lead to a resignation? I doubt it. I guess this will be where GB follows in the steps of Tony Blair...
GB was visibly riled by DC's questions and he typically started throwing his notes down on the dispatch box. After accusing DC 'of misleading the house' and being reminded to use 'temperate language' by the Speaker, he gave DC the opportunity to use the line about Brown 'A new kind of politics...a hundred days ago and it feels like a hundred years ago'. At this point the Labour benches were clearly silent, similarly to three weeks ago. If this continues and the polls don't improve, how long before the mutterings begin?
A clear win for DC.
P.S. Is it me or is Vince Cable asking better questions than Ming Campbell?
Squiffy.
During DC's first three questions regarding the Government's plans to recoup five percent of schools surpluses, twice GB made reference to the fact that the schools would not have a surplus had it not been for the Government's generosity. How condescending.
Schools are given a budget and (hopefully) try to live in their means, if there are some plans for a big project then they would naturally keep some of the money back each year to plan ahead. But GB thinks he knows better and can take the money back 'for the good of the children' and for who knows what. What are the incentives for schools to plan wisely? None, if this continues we'll see annual deficits in school budgets.
DC's second set of questions were designed to get at GB via Douglas Alexander and the fiasco of this year's Scottish elections. This is Dougie's second public cock-up recently after the failure of GB to call an election. Will a third mistake lead to a resignation? I doubt it. I guess this will be where GB follows in the steps of Tony Blair...
GB was visibly riled by DC's questions and he typically started throwing his notes down on the dispatch box. After accusing DC 'of misleading the house' and being reminded to use 'temperate language' by the Speaker, he gave DC the opportunity to use the line about Brown 'A new kind of politics...a hundred days ago and it feels like a hundred years ago'. At this point the Labour benches were clearly silent, similarly to three weeks ago. If this continues and the polls don't improve, how long before the mutterings begin?
A clear win for DC.
P.S. Is it me or is Vince Cable asking better questions than Ming Campbell?
Squiffy.
F1 2007
I'll kick off with some thoughts about the recent Formula 1 season.
And what a fantastic season, if you love the politics and intrigue of F1. There could have been more overtaking, but we say that every year. I can't quite remember a season where four drivers have had the opportunity to become world champion, probably the last time was in 1986 until Ayrton Senna's chances diminished.
Of course four things will stick in people's minds.
1) The F1 Spygate saga. This has made the F1 season this year the most political since the FISA-FOCA war of 1982. I believe that both McLaren and Ferrari have failings in dealing with disgruntled employees, which led to McLaren receiving the largest fine in sport. Unfortunately, Ferrari seem to have been the beneficiary of this, claiming this year's constructors championship.
Luca di Montezemolo, Ferrari President, has made some ludicrous claims that McLaren are racing a chassis which contains a large amount of Ferrari intellectual property. The McLaren is a short wheelbase car whereas the Ferrari is a long wheelbase car, different solutions will be required for the same problems.
I tend to believe that Ron Dennis and his team have been hung out to dry by the FIA and have been treated harshly. Possibly due to some past personal antipathy with the head of the FIA, Max Mosley.
2) Kimi Raikkonen is a worthy champion. Although I would have liked Lewis Hamilton to have been crowned champion this weekend, my second preference was for Kimi. He started great with a win in Australia (in an illegal car - no punishment for Ferrari, I wonder why), dropped back for a while but then reinforced his superiority over his team mate with some cracking drives at the end of the season. He's been, too often, the victim of faulty machinery but if Ferrari find their previous rock solid level of reliability then this year will be the first of many.
3) Lewis Hamilton has star quality. From the first races of the season it was clear that this guy has star quality in abundance. He can qualify like Ayrton Senna (a vast improvement on his GP2 days), overtake like Nigel Mansell, have his wits about him like Michael Schumacher and be relentless like Fernando Alonso. A shame that he didn't win the championship as he did deserve it, but with a little more experience he will make it. Sometimes he needs to drive like Alain Prost and not Gilles Villeneuve to claim the big prize.
4) Fernando Alonso behaved like a spoilt brat. Until this year I had the utmost admiration for Alonso. He is spectacularly fast and can put in a fast consistent lap time, lap after lap. But last year there were a few signs of his petulance when he said that he 'felt alone' in Renault, even when he knew that Renault were doing all they could to help him (to the detriment of this year's car). This year he's shown how rattled he is by a fast team mate, to the extent that he was prepared to blackmail his boss into getting his own way. He throws his toys out of extremely fast pram when he's bettered, what a contrast to Lewis and Kimi. Expect Alonso to only be in teams which guarentee number one status from now on.
Well that's my thoughts on this year, shortly I will be blogging what I think will happen during the winter.
Squiffy.
And what a fantastic season, if you love the politics and intrigue of F1. There could have been more overtaking, but we say that every year. I can't quite remember a season where four drivers have had the opportunity to become world champion, probably the last time was in 1986 until Ayrton Senna's chances diminished.
Of course four things will stick in people's minds.
1) The F1 Spygate saga. This has made the F1 season this year the most political since the FISA-FOCA war of 1982. I believe that both McLaren and Ferrari have failings in dealing with disgruntled employees, which led to McLaren receiving the largest fine in sport. Unfortunately, Ferrari seem to have been the beneficiary of this, claiming this year's constructors championship.
Luca di Montezemolo, Ferrari President, has made some ludicrous claims that McLaren are racing a chassis which contains a large amount of Ferrari intellectual property. The McLaren is a short wheelbase car whereas the Ferrari is a long wheelbase car, different solutions will be required for the same problems.
I tend to believe that Ron Dennis and his team have been hung out to dry by the FIA and have been treated harshly. Possibly due to some past personal antipathy with the head of the FIA, Max Mosley.
2) Kimi Raikkonen is a worthy champion. Although I would have liked Lewis Hamilton to have been crowned champion this weekend, my second preference was for Kimi. He started great with a win in Australia (in an illegal car - no punishment for Ferrari, I wonder why), dropped back for a while but then reinforced his superiority over his team mate with some cracking drives at the end of the season. He's been, too often, the victim of faulty machinery but if Ferrari find their previous rock solid level of reliability then this year will be the first of many.
3) Lewis Hamilton has star quality. From the first races of the season it was clear that this guy has star quality in abundance. He can qualify like Ayrton Senna (a vast improvement on his GP2 days), overtake like Nigel Mansell, have his wits about him like Michael Schumacher and be relentless like Fernando Alonso. A shame that he didn't win the championship as he did deserve it, but with a little more experience he will make it. Sometimes he needs to drive like Alain Prost and not Gilles Villeneuve to claim the big prize.
4) Fernando Alonso behaved like a spoilt brat. Until this year I had the utmost admiration for Alonso. He is spectacularly fast and can put in a fast consistent lap time, lap after lap. But last year there were a few signs of his petulance when he said that he 'felt alone' in Renault, even when he knew that Renault were doing all they could to help him (to the detriment of this year's car). This year he's shown how rattled he is by a fast team mate, to the extent that he was prepared to blackmail his boss into getting his own way. He throws his toys out of extremely fast pram when he's bettered, what a contrast to Lewis and Kimi. Expect Alonso to only be in teams which guarentee number one status from now on.
Well that's my thoughts on this year, shortly I will be blogging what I think will happen during the winter.
Squiffy.
The First Post
Hello and welcome to my blog. I'm hoping for this to be a cathartic experience, getting things off my chest and onto the computer screen.
I will be aiming to provide my thoughts mainly on politics and occasionally other such as motor racing (formula 1 - my other passion - which has a lot of politics too). If you agree or disagree with me then feel free to vent your spleen (in the politest way possible of course).
If my thoughts make anyone think for just one minute then I will be happy.
Enjoy.
Squiffy.
I will be aiming to provide my thoughts mainly on politics and occasionally other such as motor racing (formula 1 - my other passion - which has a lot of politics too). If you agree or disagree with me then feel free to vent your spleen (in the politest way possible of course).
If my thoughts make anyone think for just one minute then I will be happy.
Enjoy.
Squiffy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
