Each of these books is different and not part of a sequence, but all of them have the common ability to draw you into the story and keep you turning the pages from start to finish. Click on any of the images for my page on Amazon UK and here for Amazon.com
The following article appears today on the BBC News Website. It is well worth reading. BBC News – The Ebola fumble in Dallas
When President Barack Obama first spoke about Ebola after an American aid worker was flown to Atlanta for treatment having contracted the disease in West Africa, he said the risk of an outbreak was small in the extreme. It was all about containment.
Spool forward to today, and let's just look at the maths for Texas alone.
The Dallas Presbyterian Hospital treated one Liberian, Thomas Duncan, who died. From caring for him, two nurses have now contracted the disease.
Nearly 80 health workers are under observation. It is claimed by the biggest nursing union that those charged with his care did not have the right protective clothing, flesh was exposed, there were no clear guidelines of what to wear, how to wear it, and how to disrobe.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) concedes that it is possible flesh was left exposed when treating Duncan. And that is why among those nearly 80 still under observation, no one can rule out the possibility that there will be further cases.
This is a crude, and damning, statistic but so far Medecins sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders) has treated thousands of people in West Africa with Ebola, and has seen 16 medical workers contract the disease. This hospital in Dallas has treated just one patient, and has two sick healthcare staff.
In the country with the most advanced healthcare of anywhere in the world, with the best trained health workers, with resources that any third world medical centre would kill for, the question that - not surprisingly - is being asked is how in the name of God is this possible.
Now if this bit causes you to arch an eyebrow, the next bit has caused many jaws to hit the floor. The day before the second nurse was diagnosed she flew on a commercial flight from Cleveland, Ohio, back to Dallas.
The CDC is now trying to reach 132 passengers who were on the plane with her as a matter of urgency. The CDC has said it was a clear breach of guidelines and protocol for a health worker under observation to fly, or travel on a bus or a train. But did the nurse herself know this?
The infected nurse flew on Frontier Airlines the evening before diagnosisRemember that word containment? It seems to be quite the reverse. It is as though someone has taken Steven Soderbergh's script from the film Contagion and decided to try to make it reality - what is it they say about life imitating art?
Of course, there is no serious outbreak in the US - there are two healthcare workers who've contracted the disease and are receiving the best possible treatment, and it may be that these will be the first and last cases contracted in the country.
But no wonder the president has cancelled his scheduled trips to New Jersey and Connecticut today. The public like to see their political leaders "gripping" a crisis. What has been seen so far is a crisis being fumbled.
Each of these books is different and not part of a sequence, but all of them have the common ability to draw you into the story and keep you turning the pages from start to finish. Click on any of the images for my page on Amazon UK and here for Amazon.com
The governor of the Bank of England, speaking in Washington, has said some very profound things. This blog reproduces the text of the BBC News report
BBC News – Mark Carney says bankers’ behaviour needs to change
Bankers’ behaviour still needs to change following the financial crisis, Bank of England governor Mark Carney has warned.
He said that top executives had “got away without sanction”.
“Maybe they were not at the best tables in society after that, but they’re still at the best golf courses. That has to change,” he said.
Mr Carney was speaking at the International Monetary Fund’s annual meeting in Washington.
The governor’s warning comes amid a radical reshape of the industry aimed at limiting the impact of any future bank collapses.
Banks will have to ensure retail customers’ deposits are protected and kept separate from their investment arms by the start of 2019.
UK financial institutions were told last week that they must submit their plans, detailing the legal and operating structure of their planned ring-fenced banks, by the end of the year.
New laws also mean that bankers found guilty of “reckless misconduct” could face jail.
Banking bailouts
Mr Carney suggested if senior bankers were unhappy with the changes, then they should resign.
“If you’re chair of an audit committee, you have responsibility for the activities of an institution. And if you don’t think you can discharge that responsibility, you shouldn’t be on that board.”
Mr Carney’s warning followed a separate speech on plans to avoid any further taxpayer bailouts of big banks, which he said would reach a “watershed” at next month’s G20 summit in Australia’s Brisbane.
“The world’s largest banks threatened the stability of the global financial system. Their bailout using public funds undermines market discipline and goes to the heart of fairness in our societies. This cannot be allowed to continue,” he added.
Separately, in an interview with US news channel CNN on Monday Mr Carney said weakness in the eurozone had been a major theme at the IMF meeting in Washington.
“The only difficulty that is caused by Europe is that it provides an additional drag on growth. But that doesn’t dictate the monetary policy of the Bank of England,” he said.
Each of these books is different and not part of a sequence, but all of them have the common ability to draw you into the story and keep you turning the pages from start to finish. Click on any of the images for my page on Amazon UK and here for Amazon.com
The party conference season is over. There have been two seismic political shocks in bye-elections. The general election is seven months away. Nobody is able to predict the outcome. All of this is an unusual configuration of confusion as the first fixed term parliament lurches forward to its close. It is a moment to assess each of the political parties in turn.
THE TORIES
On the face of it it should be good news. Cameron won the conference line up hands down. The economy is growing. The party has pulled into a small lead in some polls. There are still problems to resolve but having succeeded thus far it must make sense to be allowed to finish the job, and to finish it with a majority avoiding the need to share with the Lib Dems.
If only that is where it stopped. But there is more. The economy may have peaked and actually be slowing by next May. The recovery has been much better for the rich than for the poor. The record numbers in work are earning less and their real pay value is falling year on year. Cuts are eating into efficiency and availability of public services, yet the deficit remains and so more cuts are promised. There has been a complete failure to solve key problems of immigration and the lack of and cost of housing. Foreign policy has all but unraveled, with failure in the Middle East and in handling Russia. The sanctions imposed on Putin and the resultant ban by Russia of agricultural imports is tipping Europe back towards recession. Storm clouds are building. The election climate was much better at the end of the fourth year than it will be at the end of the fifth.
Then there is UKIP.
LABOUR
Labour made a rapid recovery from a big bad defeat and has generally been a united and strong opposition riding high in the polls for most of this parliament. Its future ambitions are not to be returned to carry on the good work of opposition, but instead to get a mandate to govern. And this is where difficulties crop up. When looked at as potential prime minister and chancellor, the geeky Milliband and the derided Balls do not inspire confidence with their own Labour voters, let alone those who have to be won back in order to win power again.
These personality issues are underscored by the fact that there is no clear narrative of hope nor a plan for remedy for all that is so obviously awry. The economy, the NHS, public services, jobs, housing, the cost of living and immigration are all at the forefront of voters’ minds in varying degrees. So is the issue of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Yet nowhere is there to be found from Labour a Big Message or a Big Idea or a Big Plan to deal with it all. There are a string of tinkerings and tweaks but nothing new or different. So if it is all going to be much the same under the two Eds, are they up to it? If the polls are to be believed the answer could be NO.
Then there is UKIP.
LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
Here things do not look good. There is no doubt that this party has performed well in coalition and its ministers have done their best and done it well. They have certainly acted as a restraint to the introduction of the raw meat of the Tory Right and have made Cameron’s government nearer the one nation Tory style of the nineteen fifties. They have managed to get quite a few of their populist policies like a much higher income tax allowance, free school meals and the pupil premium onto the statute books. But there was one promise they made, which was so special that they called it a pledge and they all signed it. This they broke. It was tuition fees. No young person will vote for them for a generation and without those votes they are electoral toast.
Yet they have one saving grace which means the party will not face oblivion, but will be reduced to a number of MPs nearer the teens than the eighty odd at their peak. The reason for this is that although the Lib Dems are a truly national party, people do not generally vote for them over national issues. Instead their support is grounded on local issues and local activists. Thus they are much more swing proof than the other main parties and polls do not reflect this local strength. This will save them. They will lose a lot of seats and loads of deposits but here and there they will hang on. As they always have.
UKIP will make no difference.
UKIP
Over twenty years of gestation this party has passed though a period of the fruitcake image and the far right extremists and become something more deadly than any political force since WWII. It now offers an exciting blend of nationalism, anti-EU, immigration, anti-establishment, anti Westminster elite, bankers, profiteers et al which inspires and thrills all those with a grumble about anything, right to left, rich and poor, north and south. There is a paucity of detail but a richness of vision. Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell are now the rain makers of British politics. The election will be fought to their agenda and on their terms. Anything can happen.
Like it or not UKIP will decide the outcome in 2015. They aim to hold the balance of power. The effort may sink them. Or they may become the power itself.
The news that this increasingly right wing Tory party, in flight from the UKIP attack, is now promising to unravel the Human Rights Act, has upset two of its most distinguished grandees and rightly so. Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke have been busy on the media expressing anxiety and dismay at the plans put forward by Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary.
Whatever the frustrations of Ministers over its application in cases they lose, we need this to stay in force for one very good reason which overrides all other considerations. We do not have a written constitution. This means that the constitution can be varied at any time by parliament. It is often an advantage to be able to do this; the Scottish referendum and the subsequent promise of rapid extensions to devolution are good examples.
But there is a shortfall and it is a big one. With a written constitution the terms are approved by the people in a referendum and provide a rule book not only guaranteeing their rights, but also the framework within which they are to be governed; rules for government which government cannot be varied without the specific authority of the people. With that kind of instrument underpinning the State, it could be argued that a Bill of Rights incorporated into it would be secure and binding, beyond the reach of parliament. But under the proposals put forward by Grayling, it is a fact that any legislation granting a Bill of Rights can readily be superseded by legislation from a later government to take it away.
That is why, while Britain remains one of only three countries in the world without a formal constitution approved by the people, they are guaranteed their freedoms by an instrument, the European Convention on Human Rights, which in the final analysis is beyond any government’s control. This is what ails the Tory right. Everyone else should see it as their ultimate guarantee of freedom.
After the conclusion of the two big conferences Labour remains ahead in the polls, but only just and its lead is within the margin of error. If the issue were decided on conference quality, the Tories would win, not least because of their steadiness under fire from scandal and defections. If the issue were decided on the credibility, performance and popularity of the leaders, both within their parties and outside, it would be game set and match to Cameron. If it were decided on the credibility of which party has the better candidate for chancellor, there would be no contest. Should each team be lined up, it would stand out that Labour has more effective women, but the Tories have Teresa May. So why is Labour anywhere near the lead in any poll?
Is it all down to UKIP? Not at all, because UKIP is a manifestation of dissatisfaction with Tories about their party, which is now broadening its base to include Labour voters who feel the same about theirs. UKIP may also be reaching those who do not normally vote. The problem for the Tory party is best set down under three headings.
The first is that their obsession with home ownership inaugurated by Thatcher, has created a distorted economy where house price inflation and the borrowing both by individuals and the government to keep up with it, not only created the crash, but has been used again by the Tories to build the recovery which thus cannot last. The shape of the economy is such that for the first time for centuries money is sucked from the poorest to give to the richest.
The second is that the party is split over Europe. We do not need to explore this; it is a fact well known. It is also a fact, as well known, that split parties rarely win.
Third is the Tory propensity to bribe electors with rash promises over tax which are difficult to fulfill. Every economic commentator is today asking questions about how it is possible to cut the deficit and taxes at the same time. The answer is you cannot without cutting expenditure as well. To meet the Tory promise of eliminating the deficit plus a £12.500 threshold and £50.000 before you get to pay higher rate tax, will require a £ 30 billion plus cut in government expenditure per annum. So far less than a third of that has been discussed so what are they hiding?
Out on the streets there is distrust of politicians to the point where few take any notice of what they promise anyway. But it is on the streets that reality kicks in. And reality says that things are tough for the majority and likely to get tougher. When it comes to instinct the feeling out there is that Labour is on the side of people who are finding it tough, who are working very hard, yet struggling to get by. There are an awful lot of them. They pay no attention to big speeches or understand the complexity of the issues. They only know that under Cameron’s government the rich have got richer and the poor have got poorer. They really do not care if Ed Milliband is a touch forgetful or that Ed Balls is a bit of a laughing stock, because inspite of these failings, they are still on their side.
That is why Labour is still just ahead and why the outcome for the Tories is by no means assured.