Earthrise revisited

The Artemis II mission is heading home after successfully looping around the moon over the Easter weekend. Two days from now, they’ll splash down in the Pacific Ocean, off the coast of San Diego. NASA has been sharing images taken by the four astronauts on board Integrity, the mission’s gumdrop-shaped capsule, as it passed behind the moon. This includes a stunning Earthset and a dramatic solar eclipse (featuring a cameo appearance by several planets).

These images have rekindled the hope and wonder inspired by Apollo 8, the first crewed mission to visit the moon. At the time, much like this week, another Christian festival was underway. It was Christmas Eve 1968. As the Apollo 8 astronauts orbited, they watched the moon’s grey and desolate, crater-pocked surface passing below. Then, something unexpected happened.

The Earth began rising above the horizon. This delicate, blue marble was beguiling. It sat alone in the vastness of space. A fragile, spherical island of life in the inky darkness. Every aspect of the Apollo mission, including a photography timeline, had been planned well in advance. However, nobody anticipated this moment. It caught everyone by surprise.

Apollo 8’s earthrise photos inspired a generation and kick-started the environmental movement that endures today. Once again, Artemis II has captured similar images, reminding us of our human frailty. Apollo 8 astronaut Jim Lovell talked about a moment in flight when the simple act of raising his thumb in front of him was enough to hide the Earth.

“Everything you’ve ever known is behind your thumb,” he said. “All the world’s problems, everything. It kind of shows you how relative life is and how insignificant we all are here on Earth. Because we are all on a rather small spaceship here.”

 

One American wrote a simple message to the Apollo astronauts shortly after their return. “You saved 1968”. It’s all too easy to forget that 53 years ago, America had endured a chaotic and violent year. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy had both been assassinated. Race riots had caused many American cities to burn. The Vietnam War was in full swing, and the protest movement against it was growing. Lyndon Johnson had dramatically decided not to seek reelection.

Step forward 53 years, and history seems to be repeating itself. America is embroiled in an increasingly unpopular war. The nation is deeply polarised. A looming threat of recession hangs over the global economy. Once again, our world feels harsh and the future uncertain. Then, a tiny spacecraft circling the moon sends back an image of hope. Once again, we’ve left Earth only to look back and rediscover it anew. This is why I love spaceflight. In its finest hour, it gives us hope for the future.

UPDATE:  11 April 2026

The Artemis crew has just splashed down safely in the Pacific about 100km off the coast of San Diego. Humanity's first flight to the moon in more than 53 years has delivered a textbook landing. The live coverage beaming from space as the Orion capsule entered the atmosphere was extraordinary.  

Incredibly, we watched the capsule separate from its service module live, and then saw the first glow of reentry happen in real time. In an age of AI, the vision was surreal. At times, it honestly looked fake. How sad it is to think that AI is tarnishing the magic of life's momentous events.

Watching Artemis splashdown was a rather poignant moment. As I child I vaguely recall watching an Apollo capsule splashdown on television. At the time, we were visiting family friends in Wellington. If I had to hazard a guess, I’d say this was Apollo 17 returning from the moon in December 1972. I would have been seven years old at the time, just old enough to recall such an historic event.

Living in two worlds

Today’s headlines reflect the best and worst of humanity. This morning, NASA launched a manned rocket that’s now heading for the moon. Artemis II is scheduled to spend ten days in space. For the next 25 hours, four astronauts will orbit the Earth at an altitude of 74,000km, checking and testing their Orion capsule's systems, before reigniting its service module engine and sending it towards the moon.

The astronauts won’t land on the moon’s surface. That feat is reserved for a future mission. Instead, they’ll loop around Earth’s natural satellite in what’s known as a free return lunar fly-by trajectory. This is a flight path that uses the moon’s gravity to automatically return the capsule to Earth without firing its rocket again.

In many ways, Artemis II resembles Apollo 8. This mission, which launched in December 1968, was the first time humans flew to the moon and returned safely to Earth. However, unlike the current mission, Apollo 8 went into orbit around the moon, circling it ten times before reigniting its rocket and returning to Earth.

Artemis II will establish at least one space exploration first. Its free-return trajectory will see it fly more than 7400 kilometres past the far side of the moon, more than 400,000 kilometres from Earth. This is the furthest any human has ever ventured into space. Apollo astronauts typically flew less than 120 km above the moon’s surface.

Artemis II represents human ingenuity at its finest. It’s a potent symbol of what we can achieve as a species when we aspire to greatness. It’s also an inspiring example of the USA’s extraordinary wealth, leadership and technical know-how.

Contrast this with the war currently unfolding in the Middle East. Five weeks ago, the USA and Israel launched a coordinated aerial attack on Iran. Since then, both nations have relentlessly bombed the Persian nation, destroying military assets and killing its leaders. Iran has responded by attacking its Gulf neighbours, damaging critical oil and gas production infrastructure, while attacks on tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz have all but stopped oil from flowing out of the Middle East.

President Trump's rationale for starting the war and its ultimate objectives have morphed over time. However, one thing is clear. The quick and easy victory he plainly anticipated has failed to materialise. There's now every prospect of the USA becoming bogged down in prolonged conflict or withdrawing shortly, only to be drawn back in to finish the job at some future point.

The Iranian regime’s resolve hasn’t weakened, despite the devastation of American and Israeli airborne attacks. Instead, global economic activity is cracking under the strain. To quote a recent commentator, “The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has transformed economic prospects globally from the relatively benign to inflationary and, very possibly, in a worst-case scenario, deeply recessionary.”

What seems to have become an increasingly pointless conflict is now at risk of damaging the world’s economy for months, if not years, to come. Iran’s regime remains intact and inevitably more motivated than ever to accelerate its ambitions to develop a nuclear weapon. I'm not sure it's made the world a safer place. 

Meanwhile, here in Australia, most commentators, including the Reserve Bank of Australia, expect inflation to peak at five per cent, further interest rate rises, higher unemployment and greater economic uncertainty. It’s not the kind of year anyone wanted. The USA’s capricious actions in the Middle East stand in stark contrast to this morning’s historic launch at the Kennedy Space Centre. It's like we're living in two completely different worlds.

UPDATE: 10:58am, 3 April

I've just watched live as the Orion spacecraft completed its Translunar Injection Burn, a five-minute rocket burn that sends it to the moon. The last time humans headed for the moon, they were on board Apollo 17. This final moon landing mission took place in December 1972, more than 53 years ago. 

UPDATE: 4 April

The image above was taken by one of the astronauts aboard Orion. It shows the Atlantic Ocean bordered by Africa on the right and cloud-covered South America on the left. If you look closely, you can see auruoa glowing over both poles. Venus makes a guest appearance in the top left corner. The last time we saw an image like this was during Apollo 17.

UPDATE: 7 April

The Orion capsule has safely swung around the far side of the moon today.  The four astronauts on board are now on their way back to Earth. NASA published the image above overnight. If you look carefully, you'll see Australia and a heavily cloud-covered New Zealand are on display. I've rotated the image 90 degrees to make them easier to spot. Awesome!

Landslide election

Australian politics was transformed by last weekend’s Federal election. Against all expectations, the Australian Labor Party returned to power with an increased majority, a higher primary vote, and a decimated opposition. Vote counting is still underway, and some of the most tightly contested seats may take another week to declare.

However, one thing is clear. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has defied the so-called "incumbency curse" to be re-elected Australia's prime minister in what can only be called a landslide. Heading into the election, the current Government had a majority of one seat. On current projections, Labor will finish with more than 90 seats in the Lower House, at least 14 more than the 76 seats required to secure a majority Government.

The Coalition opposition will struggle to finish with more than 40 seats in the Lower House. Furthermore, the current opposition leader, Peter Dutton, has lost his seat. This is the first time in Australian history that an opposition leader has lost their seat in an election. Equally, this is the Coalition’s smallest caucus since Federation. The state of Tasmania now contains only Labor MPs (and one longtime independent), while most capital cities have at best one or two Coalition MPs in the metropolitan area (Adelaide and Brisbane have none). 

Since WWII, only four incumbent Governments have increased their primary vote during an Australian federal election, but none at the level of the current Government, and none have increased their majority. Albanese becomes the first prime minister to win back-to-back elections in over 20 years. It’s all too easy to forget that Australia churned through nine prime ministers during this period. Before that, we'd experienced 12 years of relative stability under John Howard.

The result is even more extraordinary given how badly the Government was trailing the opposition in opinion polls four months ago. In January, the polls predicted a resounding win for the opposition, with the opposition leader beating Albanese as preferred Prime Minister. Australia looked set to follow the rest of the world and back a more conservative, right-wing Government. Two factors have swung the vote in favour of the Labour Party.

First, the USA’s global tariff trade war has boosted the fortunes of incumbent parties for many US allies, as voters seek stability amid growing uncertainty. Just two weeks ago, the incumbent Canadian Government was returned to power after trailing badly in the polls earlier this year. For months, the nation had endured repeated rhetorical attacks by the new American president and been subjected to rising tariffs. In response, Canadian voters rallied behind the flag and rejected the opposition's strongman-style of divisive politics.

Here at home, Dutton also played the strong man card. He occasionally mimicked Trump's assertive style, adopted elements of his conservative policies and provoked culture war debates. For much of 2024 and the early months of this year, his approach was a winning strategy. Support for Dutton and the Coalition grew steadily stronger in the polls. 

That is, until the chaos of Trump’s first hundred days progressively turned Australians against the reelected president in record numbers. By late April, polls reported more than 70 per cent were concerned the Trump presidency would make them worse off financially this year. As a result, once aligned with the US president in the eyes of Australian voters, Dutton struggled to distance himself from this association.

Second, the Coalition ran an extraordinarily complacent and often dysfunctional election campaign. Spokespeople regularly contradicted their leader, sometimes within hours of a policy announcement. More than one policy was dropped or amended on the fly, while others lacked substance when scrutinised by the media. The apparent lack of preparation caught many by surprise.

Whether you support Labor or not, the possibility of a stable Government and stable leadership for the first time in two decades offers plenty of potential. As the Sydney Morning Herald stated a week or so ago, Albanese is the better option for Prime Minister, but only if he does something bold with his mandate.

I couldn’t agree more. We’ve had five years of “small target” politics where both sides of the house have played it safe. The reforming zeal of the Hawke/Keating years, and even the tax reforming initiatives of the Howard Government, are long overdue. Australia desperately needs tax reform, more efficient Government and budget discipline that brings its Federal budget back into sustained surplus. Let’s see what happens next.

Update: 20 May

Vote counting has finally concluded. Labor secured 93 seats, giving a 38-seat majority in the lower house. The Liberal National coalition finished with 43 seats. Another 12 seats went to independent candidates and The Greens. In the upper seats, Labor only needs the support of The Greens to pass legislation in the Senate.

27 million and counting

The Australian Bureau of Statistics' (ABS) population clock ticked over 27 million around 3.45pm AEST on Wednesday, January 24. This incredible milestone reminded me of a similar headline in 2018. At the time, we were in Melbourne exhibiting at an annual trade show. Despite the late hour, I recall lying in bed watching the clock tick over 25 million. It's hard to fathom that, less than six years later, another two million people live in Australia.

The country's population has grown by an extraordinary 624,100 over the past 12 months. That's equivalent to adding the entire population of Tasmania (572,800) in just one year. This rapid growth easily exceeded the previous record of 442,500 set in 2009. 

Therefore, it's no surprise the nation is experiencing a massive housing shortage. The strain is present everywhere you look. The national rental vacancy rate was 1.09% in January, falling 0.04 percentage points over the month. In Sydney, the rate dropped to 1.20%, while the median price for rentals in the city hit $900 a week, up 20% on the previous year. Perth still maintains the lowest vacancy rate in the country at 0.76%. Meanwhile, rental affordability is at its lowest in at least 17 years.

The Federal Government is currently working with the States to build 1.2 million new homes over the next five years.  As part of this initiative, New South Wales is committed to building more than 380,000 homes, or 75,000 homes annually.  However, with high-interest rates and rapid inflation dogging the construction sector, it's no surprise this target isn't anywhere close to being met. 

Here at home, we're already feeling the impact of these market dynamics. Our apartment building is currently tendering for retrospective repairs to its fire protection infrastructure. Over the last two years, quotes for these works have increased by a third. We're now scrambling to find another $200,000 to get them underway. 

In the current economic climate, how can any first-home buyer afford to build, let alone buy, a home?  Affordable housing is a pressing national policy issue. It'll be interesting to see how bold politicians will be as they strive to solve the current crisis.

Prime Minister No.9

Australia’s ninth prime minister in 15 years has just been elected. It’s been a bit of a revolving door at the Lodge since John Howard was defeated in the 2007 election. We now have Anthony Albanese as our new Prime Minister. Given the pace at which Prime Ministers have churned in recent years, I wonder how long he'll last? Watch this space!

UPDATE: 30 May

The new Labor Government will govern with a razor-thin majority of one seat. However, the talk of this year's election is the rise of the independent Teal movement. Six formerly safe Liberal seats in urban and suburban areas, held by the party and its predecessors for decades, were won by independents (who’ve adopted the colour teal as their distinctive branding), unseating Liberal incumbents, including Treasurer and Deputy Liberal Leader Josh Frydenberg. 

Seats that have progressively fallen to independents in recent years include those previously held by Liberal Prime Ministers such as John Howard, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull. Urban voters are clearly turning against the Coalition's polarising right-wing conservatism. It'll be interesting to see how the opposition evolves over the next three years.

Standing room only

In November this year, I’ll celebrate the 30^th anniversary of my first visit to Australia. I arrived in Sydney in 1988 courtesy of Procter & Gamble.  It flew me across the Tasman as one of two short-listed candidates for an annual university graduate recruitment program.  I spent a week attending meetings and enjoying the city’s popular tourist highlights. However, I ultimately decided that a career promoting toothpaste and laundry detergent wasn’t the life for me.

Two years later, in 1990, a simple quirk of fate found me back in Sydney with credit card debt to repay after months of backpacking in Europe. At the time logic dictated that a Summer job earning Australian dollars would clear my New Zealand dollar debt faster than a job in New Zealand.  I ultimately settled here and have never looked back.

Compared to regional New Zealand, Sydney was an exciting and dynamic city.  At the time Australia’s population had just passed 17 million people while Sydney, its largest city, had reached 3.5 million.  New Zealand’s entire population at the time was a mere 3.3 million. However, despite its size, I found it easy to drive around inner Sydney and a parking space could be found with relative ease in the CBD. Decades later Australia’s population has grown in extraordinary leaps and bounds.

Last week the Australian Bureau of Statistics' official population counter ticked over 25 million.  Greater Sydney’s population also passed the 5 million mark.  It’s staggering to think that since I've arrived in Australia another 8 million people have joined me here.  The largest single factor driving the increase is net migration.  An astonishing 33% of the population were born overseas including more than half a million Kiwis.

The strain of rapid population growth can be seen everywhere you go.  Sydney’s major roads slow to a crawl during peak hours and its trains are regularly filled to overflowing.  In our local area, thousands of new apartments have been built with thousands more under construction. The area between our apartment and airport is on track to become Australia's most densely populated district within three years.  

The resulting influx of residents has resulted in traffic chaos in rush hour.  Queues block the pavement at every bus stop and even during the weekend local trips regularly involve navigating your way through a perpetual traffic jam. It, therefore, comes as no surprise to hear that Sydney, and the state of New South Wales, are in the midst of a massive infrastructure boom.  

Two new rail lines and three motorways are under construction. Another rail line and four motorways are now in the final stages of planning. Between Sydney and Brisbane the notorious Pacific Highway is being converted to a dual carriageway. Currently, about 81% of the 657-kilometre route between Hexham and the Queensland border are now a four-lane divided road. An upgrade of the remaining section is scheduled for completion in 2020.

The 25 million population milestone is prompting a national debate about the nation’s high rate of migration.  On current trends, by mid-century Australia’s population could pass 40 million.  Some argue that this is too many, or at least, too many in too short a time frame.  Personally, I support a higher population. 

Over the last decade, a high migration rate has offset the impact of an ageing population as the average Australian lives longer.  It’s also helped sustain a quarter century of uninterrupted economic growth.  This performance recently became the world's longest recession-free growth period for any developed economy in modern times. 

While living in the UK we also saw first-hand the benefits of a larger economy. Regular readers of this blog may recall that shortly after we arrived in London, the UK’s population passed 60 million for the first time.  A larger population increased the availability of all manner of goods, funded an impressive array of infrastructure and supported a bewildering array of cultural experiences including London’s famous West End theatre district.

A land that time forgot

There’s a lot about modern politics that disappoints me. I vividly recall the euphoria and optimism that followed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of communism in Eastern Europe. Sadly, in the decades since, the progressive values and economic benefits of liberal democracy have slowly eroded. Those early years of hope and rising aspirations are long gone.

Instead, hope for a better life has been replaced by "self-sabotaging events" (to quote one recent commentator), such as Brexit and the rise of populist leaders like Donald Trump in the USA and
Viktor Orbán in Hungary. In China, Xi Jinping has turned his back on the liberalising reforms of Deng Xiaoping. In Russia, Vladimir Putin is hell-bent on restoring the oppressive Soviet levers of state control dismantled by Mikhail Gorbachev.

These trends certainly don’t operate in a vacuum. Liberal democrats haven’t done enough to support those impacted by global trade liberalisation. Equally, they’ve failed to explain how liberalisation has improved the lot of millions, including those voting for leaders like Trump. It's frustrating to see the very people protesting globalisation enjoying a higher standard of living made possible by all the cheap goods and foodstuffs they buy at Walmart and Primark. Likewise, the material economic benefits of the European Union were cynically ignored or downplayed by leave campaigners.

Protesters we encountered in New York in January

The truth is that globalisation hasn’t let them down. Rather, failures in policy have. There’s absolutely no reason why the world’s wealthiest nation cannot afford universal healthcare and deliver it without the burden of a profit motive. Equally, the USA, of all nations, can afford to pay its people a living minimum wage. It's no wonder populists are having a field day. I worry that history will inevitably show that many of these men (and most of them are men) ultimately leveraged the disenfranchisement of working-class citizens for little more than personal gain, self-aggrandisement and political power.

Why this rant? Sadly, Australia hasn’t been immune to this depressing trend. For the last three months, we’ve been enduring a fractious debate about legalising same-sex marriage. For more than a decade, public opinion polls report a clear and growing majority of voting-age Australians support same sex marriage. However, despite this clear and unequivocal message, the current Government lacked the courage to legislate this change without a divisive national plebiscite.

Instead, in an attempt to appease (or more likely, neutralise) the far right of the current Coalition Government, we’ve endured months of debate about a matter most Australians have no issue with. Since 12 September, the Australian Electoral Commission has been conducting a national postal survey, although most people call it a postal vote. Voting ended on 7 November.

The survey results were announced on 15 November. 61.6% of those responding expressed support for legislating same-sex marriage. 38.4% voted no. In every state and territory, a majority of votes also supported the change. Within hours of the results being announced, the Marriage Amendment Bill was tabled in Parliament. This bill was passed into law a few weeks later with an overwhelming majority. As of 7 December, same sex couples are finally free to marry. 

This article in the Sydney Morning Herald pretty much sums up the last few months and years. What was all the fuss about?

Royal riots

Our last full day in London has dawned with news that a car carrying Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall was attacked by protesters last night. The heir to the British throne was en route to the annual Royal Variety Performance when a mob, protesting against higher university tuition fees, set upon his car. The rear passenger window was cracked, the doors dented by kicks, and the vehicle splattered with white paint. The couple were understandably shaken but unharmed.

All week the capital has been gripped by increasingly violent protests as the Government prepared to vote on higher fees. Parliament approved the fee hike yesterday in a vote commentators are calling the first real test of the nation's coalition Government.  Twenty one Liberal Democrat MPs eventually voted against the measure, reducing the Government's majority by 42 votes. 

The increase is yet another unpopular measure set in place as part of the Government's growing austerity program. Such protests and their depressing headlines are increasingly a sign of the times in Europe. It's hard not to feel that perhaps Garry and I have chosen a good time to return to Australia.

Austerity blues

A 24-hour strike has been called on Monday across the Underground network. It’s the second strike in a month as unions fight plans to close ticket offices and cut 800 jobs. Another two strikes are threatened in the months ahead if the dispute isn’t resolved. Today’s paper was also reporting news of a two-day strike at the BBC. Journalists, technicians and other broadcast staff are due walk out on October 5 and 6 over a growing pension dispute.

Such protests appear to be on the rise throughout Europe as Governments begin implementing increasingly painful austerity plans. On Wednesday a general strike was called in Spain, while protests against austerity measures were held in Greece, Italy, the Irish Republic and Latvia. France has also witnessed angry protests against a planned increase in the minimum retirement age.

Such protests seem dangerously devoid of reality as European Governments continue chalking up staggering deficits. Yesterday the Irish Government announced that its bail-out of the nation’s banks had risen to 45billion euros. The increase will see the government run a budget deficit equivalent to 32% of GDP this year. One statistic really captured my imagination; each Irish taxpayer has forked out the equivalent of 22,500 euros to keep Ireland’s banks solvent.

Elswhere, France has already announced plans to cut spending by 45billion euros over the next three years. The German government has proposed plans to cut its budget deficit by a record 80billion euros. The Italian government has approved austerity measures worth 24billion euros over the next two years. Spain has announced spending cuts of at least 8% and on it goes.

In the UK, on October 21, the Government will announce the results of its ambitious spending review. Almost every Government department will outline proposed spending cuts between 25% and 40% over a four-year period. Once agreed these measures will be progressively introduced starting early next year.

It's clear that strikes and protests will be an increasingly dominant news theme in the months ahead.

Strange bedfellows

As I was boarding my plane to New York last month televisions across the airport terminal were broadcasting live images of British history in the making. The former Prime Minister Gordon Brown was announcing his resignation, before driving to Buckingham Palace to officially inform the Queen. This moment marked the end of five fascinating days as Britain’s first coalition Government in 70 years negotiated the terms of its eventual political union.

The Conservatives agreed to form a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats. This is the first time these two parties have ever agreed to a power sharing deal at a national level. Conservative leader David Cameron leads the new government as Prime Minister, while the Liberal Democrat’s leader Nick Clegg serves as deputy prime minister. The Lib Dems also have five seats in Cabinet with a further 15 ministerial jobs likely to follow.

I found the daily political twists and turns of this unfolding news story fascinating. The local media went into a collective frenzy immediately after the election. The reaction was completely out of kilter with reality. Unlike the UK, coalition governments are the norm across Europe as only five nations here are currently governed by a single party holding a majority of the electorate’s primary vote.

I think the new coalition will be good for Britain. Last month’s election result forced two parties to merge their policies, resulting a legislative agenda that now meets more of the electorate’s expectations. During the election both parties had held unnecessary extreme positions on several policies as they attempted to quash internal dissent. Now, with negotiations over, the new coalition’s revised policy agenda is actually something I rather like. I’m sure much of the electorate feels the same.

In fact, the creation of a Coalition government seems to have gone some way to neutralizing the influence of both party’s extremists. I'll support anything that reverses the trend of endless polarising partisan politics. This change can only bode well at a time when public confidence in politics and politicians is at an all time low. Garry and I have certainly picked an interesting time to live and work in the UK.

Making headlines

We’ve returned safely from vacation in Greece. Our final days were spent in Athens, a city very much in the news this week as images of violent riots and protests outside the Greek Parliament were broadcast around the world. We were understandably anxious as our aircraft landed on Thursday less than 24 hours after the worst of the violence. However our fears proved unfounded. While the scars of violence were evident law and order had been very much restored before our arrival.


Our hotel was situated on the main boulevard that runs south from Syntagma Square where Parliament is located (it's the large yellow building in the top right corner of the photo below). We originally booked the hotel as a result of its rooftop bar offering an uninterrupted view of the Acropolis. However, this outdoor vantage point proved ideal on our first evening for watching an enormous peaceful protest march make its way towards Parliament. Hours earlier the road outside our hotel had been blocked off by police which enabled tens of thousands of people to pour onto the streets, waving banners and chanting slogans. This was clearly a peaceful family affair as we saw plenty of parents pushing children in strollers.


As you can imagine, we chose to dine in the rooftop restaurant that evening rather than venture into the city. However, as darkness fell, the road below reopened and the city seemed to return to normal. News stories later reported minor clashes with police after the main protest had dispersed, but we saw none of this from our hotel. We saw no further protests after our first night and felt safe on the streets at all time.

Instead, every so often, we’d come across evidence of the week’s earlier violence. Cracked shop front windows, including our own hotel’s lobby, could be seen along the street and on our last night we stumbled upon a burnt out car dumped in a side street. We even had a news reporter in the room opposite our own, making regular broadcasts from his hotel balcony.


The final irony of this entire affair was the return of volcanic ash to the skies of Europe. Protests and riots paled into insignificance as we watched airports close in Scotland, Spain and France on our final day. We were left unsure if our flight home would be delayed until we checked in at the airport. Fortunately all was normal. Our flight actually departed ten minutes ahead of schedule, landing at Heathrow almost 30 minutes earlier than expected.

Having a riot of a time

We’re off to Athens tomorrow afternoon. We’re not quite sure what to expect. There were riots in Athens today as protestors took to the streets in protest at austerity measures imposed by the near bankrupt Government. Sadly, three people were killed earlier this afternoon after becoming trapped in a bank set alight by molotov cocktail welding protesters. Earlier in the week we saw protestors vandalizing a Hotel Grande Bretagne in the main square opposite Parliament.

The images of men attacking the hotel left me cold as I’d almost booked us into this venue last week after being emailed a remarkably cheap last-minute deal. The temptation of five-star luxury was almost too good to refuse. Fortunately, we’re still booked into a hotel on the south side of the Acropolis, almost a kilometre away from Parliament and the focal point of angry protest. However, I think we’ll probably give Constitution Square a miss while we’re in town.

Tomorrow's holiday snap?
Image courtesy of Reuters

A 24-hour strike was also called today, the third to hit Greece in as many months. Flights were cancelled, trains and ferries stopped running and public facilities remained closed. There was little sign of the disruption in Santorini. We’re also hopeful our afternoon flight will depart as normal tomorrow, as flights are scheduled to resume in the morning.

It seems that public protest is a regular feature of Greek life. Almost 20 years ago, my first attempt to visit Athens was foiled by a nationwide public strike. We arrived in Patras by ferry to be greeted by power cuts, trains and buses not running, ATM machines not working and chaos everywhere. With our money running low and little hope of reaching Athens in a timely manner we abandoned Greece after 24 hours and returned to Italy.

Ironically, our travel plans this week were also disrupted by a strike. We’d originally booked a ferry from the mainland to Mykonos. However, a week ago I was advised by the ferry company that our sailing had been cancelled in response to a scheduled strike. I secured a refund and put the money towards an airfare instead. This change of plan proved fortuitous. Our flight arrived several hours earlier than our original ferry booking, enabling us to enjoy a wonderful sunset from our hotel balcony.

The Great Debate

Source: Guardian newspaper
As volcanic ash throws the UK travel and aviation industry into chaos, the nation's political landscape is also in turmoil. Last week's historic television debate among leaders of the major parties unexpectedly transformed the fortunes of the Liberal Democrats. Polls taken immediately after the television debate declared Nick Clegg, the Lib Dems leader, as the overall 'winner'.

As a result, the Lib Dems, typically the nation's third largest party and the home for traditional protest votes, were vaulted into the limelight. New polls out today suddenly show them overtaking the Labour Party as the UK's second most popular party. Labour is currently the party in Government. Overnight, the Conservatives, currently in opposition, changed their advertising strategy in a desperate attempt to derail the Lib Dem's popularity. The general election just got interesting!

Every vote counts

Gordon Brown, the UK’s Prime Minister, has finally announced a date for the nation’s next General Election. We go to the polls on May 6. As fate would have it, Garry and I will be on vacation in Greece on this date. We’ll miss one of the most pivotal elections since the Second World War.

For the first time in a generation, polls suggest the vote will result in a hung parliament. A poll out today reveals that 32 per cent of the public actually want a hung parliament (as opposed to expecting one). In other words, no major party will receive enough votes to secure a governing majority. Instead, one of the two largest parties will be forced to lead a minority government and govern in coalition with the Liberal Democrats, traditionally the nation’s third largest party. The Lib Dems received 22.6% of the popular vote during the last election, which translated into 62 seats in the House of Commons.

Tomorrow also marks another historical milestone. Tomorrow evening, for the first time in a UK election, a televised debate will be held between the leaders of the major parties. I find it fascinating that a major democracy has never had television debates. They’ve been a regular feature in Australia for several decades, and the first such debate in the USA was broadcast fifty years ago.

An estimated 20 million viewers are expected to tune in for tomorrow’s 90-minute debate between Labour leader Gordon Brown, Conservative leader David Cameron and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg. Two more debates will follow on April 22 and April 29. Months of negotiation has generated 76 specific terms and conditions on the conduct of each debate. For example, cameras aren’t permitted to film close-ups of individual audience members while a leader is speaking. Applause is also not permitted during the debate.

Another poll out today found that 42% of those contacted expect David Cameron to win the debate, compared with 22% who thought Gordon Brown would be the winner. As the Times said today, “Mr Cameron faces a real problem: It is all for him to lose. He may perform very well but that is what everyone expects and so he may not gain any great bonus from his performance. On the other hand, such are the low expectations of Mr Brown that he need only deliver a decent performance to come across as a relative Emmy award nominee.”

Australian research has shown that television debates in that country influenced the final vote by up to 2%. With Labour and the Conservatives more than three points apart in current polls, television debates could make all the difference in this election.

PS: I was interviewed by the BBC today for a lunch time busines show. The segment that went to air positioned my company as a progressive employer.

Spring at last

Tomorrow is the first official day of Spring. The daffodils and snowdrops have started sprouting. I’ve even noticed buds on some trees starting to swell. These milestone couldn’t come soon enough. Winter has been particularly wearing this season. As recently as this week we soldiered through yet another bout of rain and sporadic snow flurries. On the home front, Garry has come down with a debilitating chest cold and I’ve been working extra-ordinary hours covering for staff on leave and senior vacancies we’re currently filling. With all this happening around me, I’m beginning to truly appreciate the psychological impact of the seasons on Britain life.

Thirty years ago, during the last winter as cold as the current season, civil unrest and union strikes crippled the nation. This infamous Winter of Discontent eroded confidence in the Government of the day, paving the way for the General Election that ultimately brought Margaret Thatcher to power in May 1979. History seems set to repeat itself as the nation’s major parties prepare for another General Election. The winter’s been harsh and current economic conditions are almost a bleak.

This week the Office for National Statistics revised last quarter’s GDP growth figure from 0.1% to 0.3%. In any other year this would have been positive news. However, the Pound’s value fell during the week as fears grow that GDP will contract again during the first quarter of 2010. This so-called double-dip recession is a distinct possibility for many reasons.

January’s foul weather hit retail sales hard as people stayed home. The pound has fallen again in value making basic imports, including petrol, more expensive. At the same time, VAT (goods and services tax) has returned to its pre-recession rate of 17.5% and several other Government stimulus policies have come to an end (including a stamp duty ‘holiday’ on house sales and rebates for scrapping old cars). Finally, factor in the dampening sentiment of a pending election, and you can understand why most economists think economic growth will be subdued at best.

Roll on Summer!

ON A LIGHTER NOTE
I came across these wonderful images of our Winter. While it’s been harsh and relentless, the nation has experienced some incredible scenes. Take a look.

Who says history never repeats?

Here in the UK the Falkland Islands have been making headlines. This month, Ocean Guardian, a small British energy company began exploratory oil drilling in waters north of the islands. Its actions have provoked a storm of protest from Argentina, which claims sovereignty over this remote, wind-swept archipelago in the South Atlantic. Currently, Britain administers the Falklands, having reestablished its sovereignty in 1833 when newly independant Argentine nationals attempted to establish a settlement.

Sovereignty of the Falkland Islands is hotly contested issued. Since their discovery in the 1600s they've been claimed by France, Britain, Spain and Argentina at various times. Of course, the most recent and possibly most dramatic, of these disputes is The Falklands War. This conflict began on Friday, 2 April 1982 with an invasion and occupation of the islands and neighbouring South Georgia by Argentine forces.

Britain subsequently battled for 74 days battled to reclaim the islands, before Argentine forces finally surrendered on 14 June 1982. The death toll on both sides was surprisingly high; 255 British and 649 Argentine soldiers, sailors, and airmen, and three civilian Falklanders lost their lives. At the time, less than 2,500 people lived on the islands, alongside 600,000 sheep.

In the decades since, the British have built an airbase, upgraded much of the island's infrastructure and spend £70 million defending them. However, at last count 125 uncleared minefields remain intact. Clearing them has only recently begun. The islanders have also been integrated into the modern world courtesy of a weekly Chilean flight from Santiago and twice weekly, 20-hour flights from the UK by the Ministry of Defense. Ironically, the weekly Chilean flight is popular with Argentines visiting the graves of soliders killed in 1982. More than 4,000 make the trip each year. A supply ship arrives from Chile every two weeks loaded with fresh fruit and vegetables, while the UK sends its own supply ship every six weeks.

As oil exploration commences, the stakes have been raised. By some estimates, more than 60 million barrels of oil lie beneath the seabed. If true, these deposits equal those of the declining North Sea oilfields. Given such dramatic sums, Argentina's current outcry suddenly makes sense. Who says history never repeats?

The Green Belt

Every so often I come across an inspired British innovation. The Green Belt is one such example. It’s an urban development policy from the 1930s, developed to counter relentless suburban sprawl. At the time town planners urged local and national politicians to wrap the nation’s major cities in a “green girdle” of farm land. These green zones restricted development, maintaining a relatively clean boundary between urban and rural land use. This in turn encouraged compact residential development in British cities, significantly reducing the flight to the suburbs that blighted the inner city in other countries.

Over time this policy has resulted in 16,766 square kilomtres of green belt zoning in England alone. The impact on the landscape is significant. As you drive out of London, the scene shifts swiftly from urban jungle to tranquil countryside. Strip malls and cookie-cutter housing developments are almost non-existent. Instead, the view is punctuated by discrete, quaint villages and broad rolling fields. The contrast couldn’t be starker compared with uncontrolled development corridors elsewhere in Europe.

The Mediterranean coastline of Spain and Greece are particularly good example of this ugly, unplanned sprawl. One coastal town seems to blend into another. None have a distinctive character. The overall impression is one of concrete, clutter and commercial greed gone mad. Every time I see these coastal zones I’m left wondering why local authorities permit them as they simply discourage me from ever returning. The same can be said of many urban areas in the USA.

London's Green Belt

Currently, about 11 per cent of English land is zoned into 14 distinct green belts. The largest, and oldest, surrounds London. More than 5,133 square kilometers of protected land encircle the city. The first such zone was proposed by the Greater London Regional Planning Committee in 1934 under the leadership of Herbert Morrison, and introduced the following year. It took another 14 years to define and codify the rest of the belt that remains in place today.

The future of the nation’s green belt policy remains a political hot potato. Its preservation is actively championed by a vocal and well organized lobby group called the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE). The organisation boasts 60,000 members and the Queen as its Patron. It’s efforts have done much to prevent the densely populated UK from suffering soul-destroying urban sprawl.

It's almost time for kissing babies

This billboard appeared outside our office this month. It’s one of almost a thousand posted across the country at an estimated cost of £400,000. Each shows David Cameron, leader of the Conservative party, looking rather presidential and ever so slightly air-brushed. If opinion polls are to be believed, he’ll soon be Britain’s next Prime Minister. The nation’s general election campaign is clearly underway, well before a polling date is announced.

The British Parliament sits for a maximum of five years, after which it is dissolved and a general election is held. Much like Australia and New Zealand, the prime minister has the power to choose the election’s date. Once he (or she) calls on the Queen to dissolve parliament an election must be held 17 working days later. This year a general election must be held no later than June 3, 2010, seeking voter endorsement for 646 MPs.

We’re set for an interesting time in politics. The Conservative Party has been in opposition for 13 years. It lost power in 1997 after being soundly trounced by Labour’s largest ever parliamentary majority. How times have changed. Most polls currently show the Conservatives rating ten to 16 percentage points ahead of Labour. Worse still, the Labour Party is still saddled by enormous debts it clocked up during the last election.

At last count, Labour owed at least £11.5 million. As a result, this year’s campaign budget has been capped at £8 million. Contrast this with the Conservative Party, with debts of almost £5 million. It expects to raise a staggering £25 million for the next campaign, effectively outspending Labour three to one. Both parties spent similar amounts during the last election. By law, the main parties cannot spend more than £18 million on the campaign. However, individual candidates can spend up to £40,000 each this year, thus swelling the overall spend.

As the current billboard bitz suggests, the nation’s burgeoning public debt will be a key election issue. The Government has attempted to kick-start the economy by boosting spending. Funding this stimulus has resulted in it borrowing money a rate of more than £50 million per day. This strategy will be under intense scrutiny by the opposition. It claims that savage cuts in public sector funding must start sooner rather than later to bring national debt back under control.

No doubt, Prime Minister Gordon Brown is praying for good news tomorrow when the Office for National Statistics releases its economic data on 2009’s last three months. Commentators expect the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to show growth for the first time in 18 months, thereby officially ending the recession. Labour will be praying hard for plenty more good news in the months ahead.

UPDATE - January 26
We're officially out of recession. The UK economy grew a meager 0.1% in the final quarter of 2009. One tenth of one percent doesn't sound like much of a recovery! This result means that the 12-month economic decline in 2009 hit a record-breaking 4.8%. It's been a tough year.

Give an inch, they'll take a metre

The UK’s perpetual confusion between metric and imperial measures has cost Garry and I a fortune. In accordance with EU law, energy utilities are required to charge for services using cubic metres. As a result the local gas company regularly converts imperial meter readings to a metric equivalent and charges customers accordingly. This is a common practice in the UK where many older homes still operate meters that read gas volume in cubic feet rather than cubic metres.

This is exactly what our gas company has been doing, which would have been perfectly OK had our meter been taking an imperial measure. It was not. As a result, our already metric reading was consistently converted to metric, resulting in a calculation that more than doubled our actual use. For almost four years the gas company has overcharged us to the cumulative tune of more than £2,500. We were gob-smacked when the error was discovered. Without warning, our regular gas bill switched from a standard debit to a massive credit.

Regular readers may recall me blogging several years ago about the size of our gas bill. At the time we thought it was a result of price inflation that had hit the UK. Now we know we were being systematically ripped off. Garry ran the utility and secured a cash refund. We’re putting the unexpected windfall toward the cost of vacation already booked for 2010. Garry also tells me I can run the heating for longer each day as it’s clearly costing far less than we thought.

The UK’s stunted shift to metric measurement fascinates me. In 1969 the Government set up the Metrication Board with a remit to educate the public and promote the adoption of metric standards. 1975 was set as the target date for completing the bulk of this conversion. However, the pace of change proved far slower than expected. The change became politicized, caught up in the nation’s perpetual animosity towards the European Union, resulting in the disbanding of the Metrication Board in 1980.


Animosity was further fueled by a realization that the UK has already signed the European Directive 71/354 supporting the EU’s drive to universal metric use. The UK was legally commited to a metric future, but could set its own transition timetable. This resulted in the measures for pre-packaged goods changing in 1995, while in 2000 it became illegal to sell loose products in markets and stalls using imperial measures. The only exception was that of draught beer which could still be measured in pints.

Today, aside from beer, it seems that only distance and speed is continue to be measured in imperial units (miles and miles per hour). Almost every other aspect of daily life is metric. Temperature is measured in Celsius, weight in kilograms, liquids in litres and so on. Even the nation’s currency was converted to a metric or decimal form back in 1971. The reluctance to finally change distance and speed measures is at odds with everything else that’s happened.

I’m not sure what people fear. I recall how relatively painless the conversion experience seemed in New Zealand. In 1972 road signs were converted to metric in a matter of weeks. I recall households being issued with stickers they could place on imperial speedometers to indicate signed speed limits in km/h. We happily drove our family car for years with these stickers in place. At school, our maths class taught imperial measures one year then metric measures in subsequent years.

The irony of the UK’s resistance to a final phase of conversion isn’t lost on historians. The modern concept of a decimal measurement system actually originated in Britain. According to the UK Metric Association, the distinguished scientist and philosopher, Bishop John Wilkins, founder of the Royal Society, proposed a metric system in 1668. His "Standard" unit was almost exactly one metre and like the metre was to be divided using decimal units. He also proposed decimal units of volume and weight similar to the modern litre and kilogram.

However, it was France that first applied his ideas, going metric in 1799. The metric system was fatally tarred this point forward as a foreign, notably European, imposition. Today, only three countries have yet to adopt what’s now known as the International System of Units; Myanmar, Liberia and the United States. Perhaps Americans still believe that if they give an inch, others will take a mile? The British certainly do.

Are you in or out?

This week’s headlines brought to life another of those quirky British traits. Despite living on an island barely 35 kilometres off the coast of France, the British have an odd and often divisive love-hate relationship with the rest of Europe. At times belligerent nationalism and latent animosity towards Europe is considered healthier than embracing it. I’ve always struggled to comprehend why treating the rest of the continent with such distain is seen as progressive and endearing. As an outsider looking in, I'd argue that the opposite is true.

French and the German citizens are far more comfortable reconciling nationalism and trans-regional passion in equal measure. The British in contrast seem to struggle with the concept of being equally national and equally European. Even their language reflects this sentiment. People regularly talk of, “flying to Europe for the weekend” as if the United Kingdom wasn’t part of the continent.

Personally, I consider the European Union (EU) a glorious experiment in supra-national federalism. At University I once wrote a paper about its steady expansion from the initial Treaty of Rome to the accession of Spain and Portugal in 1986. I found it fascinating to watch the EU's jurisdiction expand across more and more territory, while progressively harmonizing pages of national legislation and introducing a common currency. The EU seemed a perfect anecdote to the zealous nationalism that had dragged the entire globe into two bloody wars.

This week the EU took another, somewhat tortured, step toward greater union as the Lisbon Treaty was ratified by the last of its 27 member states. This treaty has been almost eight years in the making. As the new millennium dawned it was clear that integrating nations of the former Soviet Bloc into the EU would make it unwieldy unless its voting practices and institutions were reformed. The original intent was to pull together the EU’s numerous treaties and agreements as a single Constitution. However, the document eventually produced was soundly rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005.

Two years later European leaders stripped back aspects of the Constitution, reducing it to a treaty able to be ratified without referendum in all but one nation, Ireland. This new treaty, known as the Lisbon Treaty, was subsequently rejected by Irish voters in June 2008, but ratified by all other national parliaments. On Tuesday, Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic finally signed an accession law previously passed by the nation’s parliament. His was the last signature required after the Irish Republic passed a second referendum in support of the treaty on October 3. Next month the treaty will officially become law across the EU.

Here in the UK the week has been filled with headlines as the British Conservative Party finally dropped its opposition to the treaty. The media also speculated on the possibility of local candidates filling two posts created by the Treaty of Lisbon; President of the European Council and, High Representative (effectively the EU’s new Foreign Minister). Former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, is being touted as the first President, while the current British foreign secretary David Miliband is considered a front runner for High Representative. I cannot help but note the irony of a nation that keeps Europe at arm’s length, while keenly lobbying for its citizen’s to fill the EU’s most coveted roles.