23.00 25.04.2008 "Magic is a performing art that entertains an audience by creating illusions of the impossible or supernatural by natural means," is one definition although there are those who will claim that magic is magic. It is one of those good coincidences that on the day Prime Minister Gordon Brown attempted to become the great illusionist I also viewed the film the Prestige which is about the illusion of film and illusion of magic. It was also the day before the National Union Teachers and the Local Government Unions planned industrial action to embarrass national government and their employers. Tomorrow I will go into more detail about the illusion created by Trotskyites that by going on strike more money will be gained than by not, and why intelligent men and woman who have spent years training to become a teacher or social worker come to believe in the illusion.
Today I will focus on the question has Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister become a greater illusionist that Tony Blair or is he a real magician as is one the characters in the book and the film, the Prestige. The prestige is a 1995 prize winning book which sues the structure of illusionist stage acts to tell a story, the set up in which the audience are persuaded that that they are witnessing reality, the performance in which the trick appears to be undertaken, and the prestige which is the finale which makes you believe that either what you have is real, or so clever that you suspend all reason. The book centres on two men who I shall call Tony and Gordon, professional tricksters, colleagues and rivals and the attempt by their great grand children to unravel the cause of the feud that developed and consequences which affected their own lives and those of subsequent generations. The focus of the book is the ability to transport a human in the blink of an eye from part of a stage to another and the traditional method of doing this is to use a double, as one disappears down a trap door another appears from a lift in another part of the stage or auditorium. In the book, with the help of a scientist, a machine is created using the latest discovery of alternate current to transport the being from one place to another, but it has an unfortunate side effect in that it also leaves a dead shell of the original which has to be disposed of.
The 2006 film is complex and merit's a second viewing. It was issued along with the Illusionist and the Scoop as Hollywood competed over three films about magic on and off the screen. In the Prestige the audience is told some professional secrets, The first is gruesome and would not be allowed on stages in the civilised world today. A bird is placed in a cage which is made to disappear, usually by collapsing into a compartment in a table, killing the bird which is afterwards disposed off, and another bird is produced to pretend that it has been transported. A woman is tied up by "randomly" selected members of an audience and dropped into a tank of water secured by a lock which is then hidden by a curtain for the time it will take for in real life the individual to drown. The audience members are part of the act and tie slip knots which enable the attractive young woman in question to use a small opening to release the trick lock. It is a dangerous trick because if the knots are incorrectly tied the person drowns as happens in the film. The third revelation is the catching of the bullet with a hand in which the gun only appears to be loaded and there when it is fired it is only the charge that goes off and bullet is already in the hand.
In the film three devices used to perform the transporting of the man illusion. One is a based on using a twin brother who swap roles but keeps the secret even from their partners, and where the twins swap their roles, while with the second device a well made up actor is used as a double. Yesterday The Daily Mail free DVD was I was Monty's double which I purchased at some cost previously when discovering (having first seen on TV) that the film features the Rock of Gibraltar and the Governor's residence where the double attended a dinner to which a known German spy and local business man was invited.
In the film both transportations devices have serious consequences for the lives of the tricksters, especially in relation to love interests and one offspring. However the main focus of the film is the impact of obsessions upon individual lives and on others. My work and writing is about my own obsessions. Recently I covered aspect of the obsession with the death of Diana, Princess of Wales ansd to-day it is Tony's obsession to serve as Prime Minister longer than Margaret Thatcher and Gordon's obsession to become Prime Minister, perhaps to serve for even longer, and the impact of this rivalry on all of us. To my mind there are similarities between some well known feuds and their causes and a subject I have written about from time to time.
This the problem of the genuine creative whether they are satisfied with a behind the scenes role or like to take the lead in putting their ideas into practice, enjoying the rewards and coping with the flak when things go wrong. There are the problems they and we experience when they are challenged by those who would like to be, or worse still think they are creatives but are not. Winston Churchill was a great creative who was given power at a time of crisis but rejected when a more even tempered and solid leader was required. Some of the best leaders know their limitations and how to make use of creatives with Margaret Thatcher being the most outstanding
In the film and the book there is reference to the greatest scientist inventor engineer of all time and typically because of his subsequently claims and eccentric behaviour he was ostracized and died in poverty. In the fiction he creates the machine which perform real magic, though I would ask what is more magical than Film. Radio and TV?
Nikola Tesla was a Serbian living in Croatia. It is alleged that he was born at midnight in an electrical storm. His father was a priest. His work was to have greater effect for good on human life than any of great religious leaders and prophets the earth world has known. He invented radio as well as perfecting alternate current and was involved with remote control, robotics, radar and computer science as well as nuclear physics.
Although he attended university he did not complete a degree and at one point he stopped attending lectures. As a young man he suffered a nervous breakdown and severed relations with his family. He is known to have read intensely and was able to reproduce complete books and to have experienced moments of great insight and inspiration. He was also the subject of constant illness, experienced blinding flashes and hallucinations. He was also capable of picture thinking in which he would see inventions in his mind before creating them and he was constantly having flashbacks to events in his life which commenced in childhood.
He first came to public attention in his mid twenties in Hungary where became the chief electrician and engineer for the national telephone company and where he also worked on twin turbine engines to create continuous power. Some believe that he created the first loudspeaker. He then went to France for a short time to be with his French mother before she died. At the age of 28 he travelled to the United States where he went to work for Edison and within a short period he was solving some of the most difficult problems of the company. When he was refused a substantial increase in salary for his work he resigned and went off to dig ditches while pursing his interest in alternate current AC whereas as a blinkered man Edison was committed to DC.
At the age of 30 Tesla created his own company promoting AC but continued to work as a labourer to feed himself. At he age of 32 he went to work for Westinghouse at their Pittsburgh Laboratories. In addition his work on AC he developed work on X rays and identified some of the dangers. His work on the transmission of electrical energy without wires led to lightening rods and electro laser electroshock weapon investigation. As his work progressed and be became a US Citizen his interests widened into philosophy and literature, and he commenced to receive recognition from his peers becoming Vice President of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers. He commenced to investigate the possibility of harnessing the energy in space. He visited London to demonstrate aspects of his work is said to have caused wonder and astonishment. His rivalry with Edison grew stronger but at the age of 41 he filed his first radio patent in 1897 and a year later demonstrated a radio controlled boat.
In 1899 he moved to Colorado Springs and showed journalists experiments attempting to transmit radio waves to Paris and a little later he believed he had witnessed extra-terrestrial communication coming from Venus or Mars, although it is now believed that he did not understand fully the technology he was creating and these were natural sources of radio energy in space. In the way that reality works Marconi rather Tesla was given the official credit for Radio with a Noble Prize for Physics thus demonstrating once more the fallibility of those who become the established great and the good. Feeling unrecognised Tesla unsuccessfully when to Law. Never a good idea unless to have great wealth and are prepared to lose as the law is about law which is separate from justice which regularly confused. In 1917 his work for Telefunken radio was destroyed by marines because it was feared it would fall into the hands of German spies. Tesla was one of the first to publish an article arguing that the League of Nations would not work as a means of solving international problems.
Alas for him during the War it is said that his obsession behaviour developed into disorder and one example is that he would walk around a building three times before entering it. So although considered by some to be partially mad at the same time he is thought to have created primitive Radar in 1917. It is known that he was negotiating with the Chamberlain government over his work on a ray system as weaponry. He was later to undertake work on aerial transportation and oceanic thermal energy. When he was 81 he was said to have completed the dynamic theory of gravity but he died before the work became available to the public and the scientific establishment of reason considered his work to exceed the bounds of reason. This reveals the inherent problem with an establishment. Inventions and innovations are always ridiculed by establishments as being fanciful and unworkable, and they more often right than wrong but they can also very wrong and it is up to the inventor and their supporters to prove otherwise.
Tesla died in 1943 destitute and with debts and the USA government seized his work papers and after being contacted by the War Department FBI assisted and his papers were declared Top Secret. Hoover declared the case most secret and there were said to be eighty trunks of work. There was then a legal battle between the USA government his family and the Yugoslav authorities. His ashes was taken to Belgrade in 1957 where a museum containing some personal effects was established. There are now statues and other forms of recognition from his portrait on a bank note to having a moon crater named after him.
In addition to speaking Serbo Croatian and American English, he could speak French, German, Italian, Hungarian and Latin. He never married and argued that chastity was very helpful to his scientific abilities. However he was also a great showman and liked to perform in public presenting his work as a Magician on a stage.
I have often thought that most politicians have to be good show people, and it appears to come naturally to those who are conviction politicians although being a conviction politician does not mean that you will be a great Minister or even a good Minister and can have disastrous consequences if given unfettered power. It is a good idea to have or two in the Cabinet and generally politicians in Government will have a few of the best as advisory staff or as researchers and policy analysts when in opposition. Most politicians in government also have to be illusionists. Once I was given an assignment by my boss in the days when I was appointed a creative staff man. The assignment concerned the establishment of one several sites in a county for use by gypsies and other travellers. I was a member of the department which was to manage the sites when they were built and therefore we would need to have excellent relations with the district councils where the sites were to be placed and with the users and their representative. The development was a corporate activity involving most departments of the county council and district authorities from planners and designers, lawyers and accounts to housing and education as well as social services and to health. Over a period of time I achieved everything set out in my brief except for one notable exception where after much discussion I was persuade that we needed to do the opposite. I attempted to contact my boss to explain the important change but he was absent during this period for most of time appearing only for Monday's mornings, Friday afternoons and for important meetings and pre meetings. Often I was responsible for the draft of a report to committee which would then be passed to various interests for their views and suggestions both within the department and other departments involved but in this instance the nature of the project was such that this responsibility went to the Chief Executive's department which had a far greater skill than I in presenting things in such a way that everyone agreed especially the decision taking politicians which in this instance would also have to meet the acceptance of the district local authorities. As a backroom worker I was not present when my chief briefed the political committee chairman about this report. I was told that the chairman listened attentively and that he looked thoughtful and said well that's seems OK except that on the question of x I understood that we were doing the opposite. I was also told that quick as a flash my boss explained that the Chairman had misunderstood what he had just said and that indeed what was in the report regarding x was the right approach as he had intended to communicate, and I was also led to believe that that it was the Chairman who apologised for getting the wrong end of stick.
Later I was given a dressing down for not doing what I had been told which was I kind of compliment because it demonstrated that usually I could be left to do what was requested even though it meant that as in this instance there were sometimes a score of other officials sitting around a table with a higher status and significantly more pay than me. I had also learnt enough to know the wisdom of not pointing out that it was his fault for not having read the document in advance of the meeting and taken the opportunity to question myself and the other key figures involved about the issue. The story was to have long term significance for me because the boss was also away when prospective employers sent their request for a reference for me to become a boss and it was left to those others with whom I had worked closely to write about me. I did not know that they had only told him what was happening when I was away for interview and I gather the look on his face was not one of pleasure although he put a brave face when I went into to his office to tell him I had been appointed not knowing any of what had gone before.
Everything that I have read about Prime Minister, Gordon Brown is that he is one of those politicians that studies everything put to him and then makes up his mind which is good thing given the consequences of impulsive decision taking which is sometimes the mark of conviction politician, especially those who lay claim to the high moral ground. He would not be caught by his official coming up with policies or legislation which did the opposite of what he had asked for. The trouble for conviction politicians, or conviction anyone is that they are not usually persuaded to do something different under threat, to gain popularity or through some form of bribery. Once they make up their mind that one course is the right thing to do they stick to it and if necessary they go down fighting for what they believe, although they are usually aware and thorough enough to side stepd traps which others knowing their style will set for them, My criticism is that twice he appears to have decided on one course and then changed his mind under pressure. This may in fact be great statesmanship and great personal courage or a loss of self confidence when finding himself alone in a new situation, albeit a situation of his own choosing.
Just over a year ago to great acclaim by his back benchers at the time he announced the reduction of the general rate of income tax from 22% to 20%. Then and since everyone has agreed this was a good thing to do. He also, almost casually announced that he was consequently abolishing the 10% rate and that overall the changes in the rates would be financially neutral and which therefore meant there would be some winners and some losers. The change would not affect anyone on long term state benefits or state pensions because they did not pay any income tax anyway. The problem and its scale was only to emerge later in that those who would gain most were those who also paid the higher rate of 40% because of the size of their incomes and those who lost most were those who were young, single, childless or woman between ages of 60 and 64 and that all together those adversely affected came to over 5 million. It is possible that the civil service and party policy analysts did not realise this would be the outcome. I have previously mentioned situations where the actual implications of a measure only become known after implementation and because of the need for budget secrecy it may not be possible to work out a proposal as thoroughly and consult as widely as would normally be thee situation. But this was not a new Chancellor in his first year of office but one of the most experienced and successful that the world has known. There is always the risk becoming over confident or for once relying on others to ensue that what was said to be the situation was. This is very difficult to do for any individual in every day life and almost impossible to manage in relation to everything so there has to be selectivity and significant reliance on others.
The more likely situation was that the Chancellor was made aware in broad terms of the position and political judgement exercised over possible repercussions including that the policy would come into effect shortly before local authority election. Perhaps it was thought that given the likely increases in annual earnings, the announcement of new benefits such as for the elderly free bus travel everywhere in England and the extra Winter fuel allowance, the loss would be absorbed. It is also likely that the former Chancellor and first Lord of the Treasury also received warnings about the international economic situation and its likely effects on prices, interest rates and incomes.
It has to be admitted that not just opposition parties expressed concern about the claim that is was a change in approach which would work out well for everyone in the long term and that no significant groups would be adversely affected. It is understood that Frank Field, a long standing specialist in how to provide services and financial benefit to the lower income members of society privately expressed his concerns to the former Chancellor and new Prime Minister over a year ago but then and up until recently the response was that the concern was misplaced.
It is also evident that for some time Treasury officials have been working on contingency plans on offsetting the losses if the matter became a political issue. It is also evident that they ran into two levels of problem. The first was how to balance the books in what was planned to be a tight financial year and a worsening international economic situation. Where was the money to come from? The approach was to propose that working parties in consultation with Labour Members and interest groups of those most affected would consider the options and report solutions in the Autumn budget statement, and then decisions would take effect in the following financial year enabling officials to work out the implementation systems required and resolve the funding problem. This was a reasonable approach in the changing circumstances.
The second problem is more fundamental and goes back to the principles of the Labour Movement, principles which other political parties have sown ambivalence. I grew up with those who remembered the pre Second World War Poor Law and the hated Means Test where the stigma tended to be lasting. The solution was to create a national health service at the point of delivery with included dentist, sight and hearing assessments and aids, a free primary and secondary education system with free school milk, and a support system of financial benefits, with state pensions and child maintenance payments available to all. Individual means assessment would continue for example for those needing supplementary financial benefits or help with further education.
The problem with this approach is that rich as well poor could claim whether it was needed or not, and as incomes rose in real terms and the costs of providing the services and benefits also escalated in real terms, and one by one a targeted approach was adopted by the Labour and other political parties, especially when it was established that the gulf between rich and poor was widening and that many individuals and families were caught in a trap where there was no incentive to seek employment. Twenty years ago it was evident to many including myself that things had to change. The number of children in families who would grow up and become tax payers was reducing and the number of those dependent on services and benefits was rapidly increasing especially among the elders. The economic structure of the country was also changing rapidly as first the heavy industries and then the manufacturing industries could not compete with those of the new industrial economies and this development escalated with the decline of the communist led autocracies.
It also has to be said that traditionally the labour movement and working class communities has not been as sympathetic to the underclass, to migrants and those who did not readily fit in with community norms and culture as it is sometimes thought. It was in London and some of the major cities that the Labour party commenced to first court and then promote the interests of minorities such as gays, those with mental health and physical disabilities, single parents and immigrants. The approach was not from socialist conviction but electoral expedience and as more and more traditional labour voters bought their former council homes, bought one and two cars and were able to holiday by plane overseas, and find that their children were able to earn more they had been able to dream of, they decided not to vote or switched allegiance to other parties.
It is also now easier to understand the growing frustration of Gordon Brown and his supporters when Tony Blair decided to stay on fight a third term election and committed himself to remaining for the greater part of that term, especially as the economic indicators revealed significant adverse medium term trends. There was need for a fresh start and approach if the Party was to gain sufficient support for a further term and for the first few months the Prime Minister did exceptionally well, convincing me that he was a conviction politician supporting long standing labour values which covered the keeping of involuntary unemployment to the minimum, the provision of suitable accommodation, the extension of life long general educational and a support structure of services and financial benefits for those with the greatest needs. He also revealed that he could handle a succession of crisis outside of government control or influence. I had reservations about some of those he rewarded into offices of state because there was evidence that they had been instrumental in the premature departure of the greatest leader the party has ever had.
Then as the Party Political annual conferences approached there was every indication that the Prime Minister decided to call an Autumn General Election. I did not understand this decision because there was no evidence that he wished to change from the Election Manifesto which had brought a third term of government to the Party but having gone down that road to suddenly change his mind smacked of personal and party self interest against the need of the British people for strong and stable government during what was evidently going to be troubled times. It was a major question mark but it no adverse effects on the British people or Britain's standing in the world. It provided a platform for the official opposition to launch a series of blistering attacks on the credibility and integrity of the Prime Minister, attacks which would have had worse consequences had the Liberal Democrats then not decided to get rid of their leader and replace him by someone yet to reveal greater substance and ability than his predecessor. Then as the new financial year approached and the media and interested organisation commenced to advise on new taxation changes there was growing realization of the numbers who would be adversely affected.
What still shocks me and stretches my credulity is that the panic button not pressed months ago to have ready a package of short and longer term measures to deal with the problem especially after the collapse of Northern Rock, the effects of the underlying problem on other financial institutions, the impact on food prices, on home energy and on petrol. All the evidence is that and time again when the issue was raised with the Prime Minister by other politicians and by journalists the response there will not be a problem and the original decision was the right one
If I was planning a policy change coup then the circumstances of last week could not have be better. Colleagues were actively engaged on the doorstep with votes and the PM and his principle advisers were out of the country in Washington. The evidence that there was growing concern within government as well on he backbenchers that about the public reaction on the streets and in their mail boxes. Perhaps because he ahd listened about the General Election and been forced to change his mind that this time he decided to hold firm and make the point that the passing of the proposed amendment would result in a confidence vote and if this was lost he would have to call a general election
There appeared to be concessions about the matter but these were along the expected and planed lines. It then became apparent that sufficient members were not nudging that a defeat was likely so first the Chancellor announced action within the year and the he communicated what this meant to colleagues including the Commons Committee. It was sufficient for Mr Field to withdraw his amendment.
18.00 What happened at Prime Minister Question was predicable in that the main opposition leaders launched a blistering and effective attack on how the situation had been reached and what this did for the credibility of the Prime Minister. The strategy of the Prime Minister was to focus on the he government emphasis on directing resources to the poorest and those with the greatest needs in society, to criticism the opposition for their performance when in government and approach since, to maintain that the original decision had been the right one and to stress that appropriate action was being planned and taken for those most adversely affected. The Prime Minister was robust, defiant and unapologetic. This was grand stuff for his backbenchers and activists in the country but also was the wrong approach for the public who needed to see someone apologetic, someone prepare to say they and got it wrong and were sorry. My forecast is that the party will lose heavily in the local authority elections especially in areas of its heartland with what happens here in South Tyneside being a barometer as the two Members of Parliament have the biggest of majorities and the Labour Party has maintained overwhelming power since 1974. I am out of touch with the position in London and the Boris effect but if he was to win the Mayoralty it would be catastrophic for Labour and for the next General Election. The Government is relying on the prospect of a successful Olympic games and the feel good factor to win the next election and therefore a sympathetic Mayor of London is essential. If Ken Livingstone loses so to will Gordon Brown and the knives will be out to quickly replace him.
Having commenced this piece about magicians and real wizards and those who would like to be but are not, Tony Blair appeared in the Houses of Parliament yesterday as a portrait of him was unveiled and disappeared again as if he had never been there without speaking to the media. Some of his supporters who were present were not so circumspect.
Here is just about time to mention one issue which arose during the Daily Politics show when Andrew Neil the distinguished presenter argued that many elderly would prefer to a higher pension and be able to chose what they did with money than perks such as free bus travel, the winter fuel allowance and free TV licences for the over 75's, Patricia Hewitt was on and to make the point that this not what she finds to be the position of her constituents.
Although my experience is out of date I can support her viewpoint against that of Mr Neil.
In the late 1970's and again in the 1980's my local authority initiated a 60000 household survey to find out what was thought about the provision of the personal social services in the area and what households would like us to do more or better if and when possible. Free travel was among the top of the pops along with the 5 penny TV licence and most of all was the appointment of additional street wardens to visit all the elders who wished once a week to find out if they were alright and if they had any problems which the council could help with.
While for those dependent on their pension and with no extended family money, free services such as these was important, the underlying reason was recognition by the community of their continuing existence after the working life had ended and the fear which all those who live on their own have of dying alone and then not being found for days afterwards. I would be surprised if the position has changed.
Today I will focus on the question has Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister become a greater illusionist that Tony Blair or is he a real magician as is one the characters in the book and the film, the Prestige. The prestige is a 1995 prize winning book which sues the structure of illusionist stage acts to tell a story, the set up in which the audience are persuaded that that they are witnessing reality, the performance in which the trick appears to be undertaken, and the prestige which is the finale which makes you believe that either what you have is real, or so clever that you suspend all reason. The book centres on two men who I shall call Tony and Gordon, professional tricksters, colleagues and rivals and the attempt by their great grand children to unravel the cause of the feud that developed and consequences which affected their own lives and those of subsequent generations. The focus of the book is the ability to transport a human in the blink of an eye from part of a stage to another and the traditional method of doing this is to use a double, as one disappears down a trap door another appears from a lift in another part of the stage or auditorium. In the book, with the help of a scientist, a machine is created using the latest discovery of alternate current to transport the being from one place to another, but it has an unfortunate side effect in that it also leaves a dead shell of the original which has to be disposed of.
The 2006 film is complex and merit's a second viewing. It was issued along with the Illusionist and the Scoop as Hollywood competed over three films about magic on and off the screen. In the Prestige the audience is told some professional secrets, The first is gruesome and would not be allowed on stages in the civilised world today. A bird is placed in a cage which is made to disappear, usually by collapsing into a compartment in a table, killing the bird which is afterwards disposed off, and another bird is produced to pretend that it has been transported. A woman is tied up by "randomly" selected members of an audience and dropped into a tank of water secured by a lock which is then hidden by a curtain for the time it will take for in real life the individual to drown. The audience members are part of the act and tie slip knots which enable the attractive young woman in question to use a small opening to release the trick lock. It is a dangerous trick because if the knots are incorrectly tied the person drowns as happens in the film. The third revelation is the catching of the bullet with a hand in which the gun only appears to be loaded and there when it is fired it is only the charge that goes off and bullet is already in the hand.
In the film three devices used to perform the transporting of the man illusion. One is a based on using a twin brother who swap roles but keeps the secret even from their partners, and where the twins swap their roles, while with the second device a well made up actor is used as a double. Yesterday The Daily Mail free DVD was I was Monty's double which I purchased at some cost previously when discovering (having first seen on TV) that the film features the Rock of Gibraltar and the Governor's residence where the double attended a dinner to which a known German spy and local business man was invited.
In the film both transportations devices have serious consequences for the lives of the tricksters, especially in relation to love interests and one offspring. However the main focus of the film is the impact of obsessions upon individual lives and on others. My work and writing is about my own obsessions. Recently I covered aspect of the obsession with the death of Diana, Princess of Wales ansd to-day it is Tony's obsession to serve as Prime Minister longer than Margaret Thatcher and Gordon's obsession to become Prime Minister, perhaps to serve for even longer, and the impact of this rivalry on all of us. To my mind there are similarities between some well known feuds and their causes and a subject I have written about from time to time.
This the problem of the genuine creative whether they are satisfied with a behind the scenes role or like to take the lead in putting their ideas into practice, enjoying the rewards and coping with the flak when things go wrong. There are the problems they and we experience when they are challenged by those who would like to be, or worse still think they are creatives but are not. Winston Churchill was a great creative who was given power at a time of crisis but rejected when a more even tempered and solid leader was required. Some of the best leaders know their limitations and how to make use of creatives with Margaret Thatcher being the most outstanding
In the film and the book there is reference to the greatest scientist inventor engineer of all time and typically because of his subsequently claims and eccentric behaviour he was ostracized and died in poverty. In the fiction he creates the machine which perform real magic, though I would ask what is more magical than Film. Radio and TV?
Nikola Tesla was a Serbian living in Croatia. It is alleged that he was born at midnight in an electrical storm. His father was a priest. His work was to have greater effect for good on human life than any of great religious leaders and prophets the earth world has known. He invented radio as well as perfecting alternate current and was involved with remote control, robotics, radar and computer science as well as nuclear physics.
Although he attended university he did not complete a degree and at one point he stopped attending lectures. As a young man he suffered a nervous breakdown and severed relations with his family. He is known to have read intensely and was able to reproduce complete books and to have experienced moments of great insight and inspiration. He was also the subject of constant illness, experienced blinding flashes and hallucinations. He was also capable of picture thinking in which he would see inventions in his mind before creating them and he was constantly having flashbacks to events in his life which commenced in childhood.
He first came to public attention in his mid twenties in Hungary where became the chief electrician and engineer for the national telephone company and where he also worked on twin turbine engines to create continuous power. Some believe that he created the first loudspeaker. He then went to France for a short time to be with his French mother before she died. At the age of 28 he travelled to the United States where he went to work for Edison and within a short period he was solving some of the most difficult problems of the company. When he was refused a substantial increase in salary for his work he resigned and went off to dig ditches while pursing his interest in alternate current AC whereas as a blinkered man Edison was committed to DC.
At the age of 30 Tesla created his own company promoting AC but continued to work as a labourer to feed himself. At he age of 32 he went to work for Westinghouse at their Pittsburgh Laboratories. In addition his work on AC he developed work on X rays and identified some of the dangers. His work on the transmission of electrical energy without wires led to lightening rods and electro laser electroshock weapon investigation. As his work progressed and be became a US Citizen his interests widened into philosophy and literature, and he commenced to receive recognition from his peers becoming Vice President of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers. He commenced to investigate the possibility of harnessing the energy in space. He visited London to demonstrate aspects of his work is said to have caused wonder and astonishment. His rivalry with Edison grew stronger but at the age of 41 he filed his first radio patent in 1897 and a year later demonstrated a radio controlled boat.
In 1899 he moved to Colorado Springs and showed journalists experiments attempting to transmit radio waves to Paris and a little later he believed he had witnessed extra-terrestrial communication coming from Venus or Mars, although it is now believed that he did not understand fully the technology he was creating and these were natural sources of radio energy in space. In the way that reality works Marconi rather Tesla was given the official credit for Radio with a Noble Prize for Physics thus demonstrating once more the fallibility of those who become the established great and the good. Feeling unrecognised Tesla unsuccessfully when to Law. Never a good idea unless to have great wealth and are prepared to lose as the law is about law which is separate from justice which regularly confused. In 1917 his work for Telefunken radio was destroyed by marines because it was feared it would fall into the hands of German spies. Tesla was one of the first to publish an article arguing that the League of Nations would not work as a means of solving international problems.
Alas for him during the War it is said that his obsession behaviour developed into disorder and one example is that he would walk around a building three times before entering it. So although considered by some to be partially mad at the same time he is thought to have created primitive Radar in 1917. It is known that he was negotiating with the Chamberlain government over his work on a ray system as weaponry. He was later to undertake work on aerial transportation and oceanic thermal energy. When he was 81 he was said to have completed the dynamic theory of gravity but he died before the work became available to the public and the scientific establishment of reason considered his work to exceed the bounds of reason. This reveals the inherent problem with an establishment. Inventions and innovations are always ridiculed by establishments as being fanciful and unworkable, and they more often right than wrong but they can also very wrong and it is up to the inventor and their supporters to prove otherwise.
Tesla died in 1943 destitute and with debts and the USA government seized his work papers and after being contacted by the War Department FBI assisted and his papers were declared Top Secret. Hoover declared the case most secret and there were said to be eighty trunks of work. There was then a legal battle between the USA government his family and the Yugoslav authorities. His ashes was taken to Belgrade in 1957 where a museum containing some personal effects was established. There are now statues and other forms of recognition from his portrait on a bank note to having a moon crater named after him.
In addition to speaking Serbo Croatian and American English, he could speak French, German, Italian, Hungarian and Latin. He never married and argued that chastity was very helpful to his scientific abilities. However he was also a great showman and liked to perform in public presenting his work as a Magician on a stage.
I have often thought that most politicians have to be good show people, and it appears to come naturally to those who are conviction politicians although being a conviction politician does not mean that you will be a great Minister or even a good Minister and can have disastrous consequences if given unfettered power. It is a good idea to have or two in the Cabinet and generally politicians in Government will have a few of the best as advisory staff or as researchers and policy analysts when in opposition. Most politicians in government also have to be illusionists. Once I was given an assignment by my boss in the days when I was appointed a creative staff man. The assignment concerned the establishment of one several sites in a county for use by gypsies and other travellers. I was a member of the department which was to manage the sites when they were built and therefore we would need to have excellent relations with the district councils where the sites were to be placed and with the users and their representative. The development was a corporate activity involving most departments of the county council and district authorities from planners and designers, lawyers and accounts to housing and education as well as social services and to health. Over a period of time I achieved everything set out in my brief except for one notable exception where after much discussion I was persuade that we needed to do the opposite. I attempted to contact my boss to explain the important change but he was absent during this period for most of time appearing only for Monday's mornings, Friday afternoons and for important meetings and pre meetings. Often I was responsible for the draft of a report to committee which would then be passed to various interests for their views and suggestions both within the department and other departments involved but in this instance the nature of the project was such that this responsibility went to the Chief Executive's department which had a far greater skill than I in presenting things in such a way that everyone agreed especially the decision taking politicians which in this instance would also have to meet the acceptance of the district local authorities. As a backroom worker I was not present when my chief briefed the political committee chairman about this report. I was told that the chairman listened attentively and that he looked thoughtful and said well that's seems OK except that on the question of x I understood that we were doing the opposite. I was also told that quick as a flash my boss explained that the Chairman had misunderstood what he had just said and that indeed what was in the report regarding x was the right approach as he had intended to communicate, and I was also led to believe that that it was the Chairman who apologised for getting the wrong end of stick.
Later I was given a dressing down for not doing what I had been told which was I kind of compliment because it demonstrated that usually I could be left to do what was requested even though it meant that as in this instance there were sometimes a score of other officials sitting around a table with a higher status and significantly more pay than me. I had also learnt enough to know the wisdom of not pointing out that it was his fault for not having read the document in advance of the meeting and taken the opportunity to question myself and the other key figures involved about the issue. The story was to have long term significance for me because the boss was also away when prospective employers sent their request for a reference for me to become a boss and it was left to those others with whom I had worked closely to write about me. I did not know that they had only told him what was happening when I was away for interview and I gather the look on his face was not one of pleasure although he put a brave face when I went into to his office to tell him I had been appointed not knowing any of what had gone before.
Everything that I have read about Prime Minister, Gordon Brown is that he is one of those politicians that studies everything put to him and then makes up his mind which is good thing given the consequences of impulsive decision taking which is sometimes the mark of conviction politician, especially those who lay claim to the high moral ground. He would not be caught by his official coming up with policies or legislation which did the opposite of what he had asked for. The trouble for conviction politicians, or conviction anyone is that they are not usually persuaded to do something different under threat, to gain popularity or through some form of bribery. Once they make up their mind that one course is the right thing to do they stick to it and if necessary they go down fighting for what they believe, although they are usually aware and thorough enough to side stepd traps which others knowing their style will set for them, My criticism is that twice he appears to have decided on one course and then changed his mind under pressure. This may in fact be great statesmanship and great personal courage or a loss of self confidence when finding himself alone in a new situation, albeit a situation of his own choosing.
Just over a year ago to great acclaim by his back benchers at the time he announced the reduction of the general rate of income tax from 22% to 20%. Then and since everyone has agreed this was a good thing to do. He also, almost casually announced that he was consequently abolishing the 10% rate and that overall the changes in the rates would be financially neutral and which therefore meant there would be some winners and some losers. The change would not affect anyone on long term state benefits or state pensions because they did not pay any income tax anyway. The problem and its scale was only to emerge later in that those who would gain most were those who also paid the higher rate of 40% because of the size of their incomes and those who lost most were those who were young, single, childless or woman between ages of 60 and 64 and that all together those adversely affected came to over 5 million. It is possible that the civil service and party policy analysts did not realise this would be the outcome. I have previously mentioned situations where the actual implications of a measure only become known after implementation and because of the need for budget secrecy it may not be possible to work out a proposal as thoroughly and consult as widely as would normally be thee situation. But this was not a new Chancellor in his first year of office but one of the most experienced and successful that the world has known. There is always the risk becoming over confident or for once relying on others to ensue that what was said to be the situation was. This is very difficult to do for any individual in every day life and almost impossible to manage in relation to everything so there has to be selectivity and significant reliance on others.
The more likely situation was that the Chancellor was made aware in broad terms of the position and political judgement exercised over possible repercussions including that the policy would come into effect shortly before local authority election. Perhaps it was thought that given the likely increases in annual earnings, the announcement of new benefits such as for the elderly free bus travel everywhere in England and the extra Winter fuel allowance, the loss would be absorbed. It is also likely that the former Chancellor and first Lord of the Treasury also received warnings about the international economic situation and its likely effects on prices, interest rates and incomes.
It has to be admitted that not just opposition parties expressed concern about the claim that is was a change in approach which would work out well for everyone in the long term and that no significant groups would be adversely affected. It is understood that Frank Field, a long standing specialist in how to provide services and financial benefit to the lower income members of society privately expressed his concerns to the former Chancellor and new Prime Minister over a year ago but then and up until recently the response was that the concern was misplaced.
It is also evident that for some time Treasury officials have been working on contingency plans on offsetting the losses if the matter became a political issue. It is also evident that they ran into two levels of problem. The first was how to balance the books in what was planned to be a tight financial year and a worsening international economic situation. Where was the money to come from? The approach was to propose that working parties in consultation with Labour Members and interest groups of those most affected would consider the options and report solutions in the Autumn budget statement, and then decisions would take effect in the following financial year enabling officials to work out the implementation systems required and resolve the funding problem. This was a reasonable approach in the changing circumstances.
The second problem is more fundamental and goes back to the principles of the Labour Movement, principles which other political parties have sown ambivalence. I grew up with those who remembered the pre Second World War Poor Law and the hated Means Test where the stigma tended to be lasting. The solution was to create a national health service at the point of delivery with included dentist, sight and hearing assessments and aids, a free primary and secondary education system with free school milk, and a support system of financial benefits, with state pensions and child maintenance payments available to all. Individual means assessment would continue for example for those needing supplementary financial benefits or help with further education.
The problem with this approach is that rich as well poor could claim whether it was needed or not, and as incomes rose in real terms and the costs of providing the services and benefits also escalated in real terms, and one by one a targeted approach was adopted by the Labour and other political parties, especially when it was established that the gulf between rich and poor was widening and that many individuals and families were caught in a trap where there was no incentive to seek employment. Twenty years ago it was evident to many including myself that things had to change. The number of children in families who would grow up and become tax payers was reducing and the number of those dependent on services and benefits was rapidly increasing especially among the elders. The economic structure of the country was also changing rapidly as first the heavy industries and then the manufacturing industries could not compete with those of the new industrial economies and this development escalated with the decline of the communist led autocracies.
It also has to be said that traditionally the labour movement and working class communities has not been as sympathetic to the underclass, to migrants and those who did not readily fit in with community norms and culture as it is sometimes thought. It was in London and some of the major cities that the Labour party commenced to first court and then promote the interests of minorities such as gays, those with mental health and physical disabilities, single parents and immigrants. The approach was not from socialist conviction but electoral expedience and as more and more traditional labour voters bought their former council homes, bought one and two cars and were able to holiday by plane overseas, and find that their children were able to earn more they had been able to dream of, they decided not to vote or switched allegiance to other parties.
It is also now easier to understand the growing frustration of Gordon Brown and his supporters when Tony Blair decided to stay on fight a third term election and committed himself to remaining for the greater part of that term, especially as the economic indicators revealed significant adverse medium term trends. There was need for a fresh start and approach if the Party was to gain sufficient support for a further term and for the first few months the Prime Minister did exceptionally well, convincing me that he was a conviction politician supporting long standing labour values which covered the keeping of involuntary unemployment to the minimum, the provision of suitable accommodation, the extension of life long general educational and a support structure of services and financial benefits for those with the greatest needs. He also revealed that he could handle a succession of crisis outside of government control or influence. I had reservations about some of those he rewarded into offices of state because there was evidence that they had been instrumental in the premature departure of the greatest leader the party has ever had.
Then as the Party Political annual conferences approached there was every indication that the Prime Minister decided to call an Autumn General Election. I did not understand this decision because there was no evidence that he wished to change from the Election Manifesto which had brought a third term of government to the Party but having gone down that road to suddenly change his mind smacked of personal and party self interest against the need of the British people for strong and stable government during what was evidently going to be troubled times. It was a major question mark but it no adverse effects on the British people or Britain's standing in the world. It provided a platform for the official opposition to launch a series of blistering attacks on the credibility and integrity of the Prime Minister, attacks which would have had worse consequences had the Liberal Democrats then not decided to get rid of their leader and replace him by someone yet to reveal greater substance and ability than his predecessor. Then as the new financial year approached and the media and interested organisation commenced to advise on new taxation changes there was growing realization of the numbers who would be adversely affected.
What still shocks me and stretches my credulity is that the panic button not pressed months ago to have ready a package of short and longer term measures to deal with the problem especially after the collapse of Northern Rock, the effects of the underlying problem on other financial institutions, the impact on food prices, on home energy and on petrol. All the evidence is that and time again when the issue was raised with the Prime Minister by other politicians and by journalists the response there will not be a problem and the original decision was the right one
If I was planning a policy change coup then the circumstances of last week could not have be better. Colleagues were actively engaged on the doorstep with votes and the PM and his principle advisers were out of the country in Washington. The evidence that there was growing concern within government as well on he backbenchers that about the public reaction on the streets and in their mail boxes. Perhaps because he ahd listened about the General Election and been forced to change his mind that this time he decided to hold firm and make the point that the passing of the proposed amendment would result in a confidence vote and if this was lost he would have to call a general election
There appeared to be concessions about the matter but these were along the expected and planed lines. It then became apparent that sufficient members were not nudging that a defeat was likely so first the Chancellor announced action within the year and the he communicated what this meant to colleagues including the Commons Committee. It was sufficient for Mr Field to withdraw his amendment.
18.00 What happened at Prime Minister Question was predicable in that the main opposition leaders launched a blistering and effective attack on how the situation had been reached and what this did for the credibility of the Prime Minister. The strategy of the Prime Minister was to focus on the he government emphasis on directing resources to the poorest and those with the greatest needs in society, to criticism the opposition for their performance when in government and approach since, to maintain that the original decision had been the right one and to stress that appropriate action was being planned and taken for those most adversely affected. The Prime Minister was robust, defiant and unapologetic. This was grand stuff for his backbenchers and activists in the country but also was the wrong approach for the public who needed to see someone apologetic, someone prepare to say they and got it wrong and were sorry. My forecast is that the party will lose heavily in the local authority elections especially in areas of its heartland with what happens here in South Tyneside being a barometer as the two Members of Parliament have the biggest of majorities and the Labour Party has maintained overwhelming power since 1974. I am out of touch with the position in London and the Boris effect but if he was to win the Mayoralty it would be catastrophic for Labour and for the next General Election. The Government is relying on the prospect of a successful Olympic games and the feel good factor to win the next election and therefore a sympathetic Mayor of London is essential. If Ken Livingstone loses so to will Gordon Brown and the knives will be out to quickly replace him.
Having commenced this piece about magicians and real wizards and those who would like to be but are not, Tony Blair appeared in the Houses of Parliament yesterday as a portrait of him was unveiled and disappeared again as if he had never been there without speaking to the media. Some of his supporters who were present were not so circumspect.
Here is just about time to mention one issue which arose during the Daily Politics show when Andrew Neil the distinguished presenter argued that many elderly would prefer to a higher pension and be able to chose what they did with money than perks such as free bus travel, the winter fuel allowance and free TV licences for the over 75's, Patricia Hewitt was on and to make the point that this not what she finds to be the position of her constituents.
Although my experience is out of date I can support her viewpoint against that of Mr Neil.
In the late 1970's and again in the 1980's my local authority initiated a 60000 household survey to find out what was thought about the provision of the personal social services in the area and what households would like us to do more or better if and when possible. Free travel was among the top of the pops along with the 5 penny TV licence and most of all was the appointment of additional street wardens to visit all the elders who wished once a week to find out if they were alright and if they had any problems which the council could help with.
While for those dependent on their pension and with no extended family money, free services such as these was important, the underlying reason was recognition by the community of their continuing existence after the working life had ended and the fear which all those who live on their own have of dying alone and then not being found for days afterwards. I would be surprised if the position has changed.
No comments:
Post a Comment