I called one of my closest friends this morning for a quick catch up. He answered the phone but immediately informed me that he couldn't talk as he was busy - he was sat on the toilet!
This got me thinking. Yes, thinking about things I wished I wasn't thinking about and thinking 'what was he doing answering the phone?!'. But it also got me thinking about technology and our instant communication culture.
Why did he feel the need to answer when the call could have waited? Why do we often feel pressured to answer emails almost before we have received them? Why do people feel the need to share their deepest feelings with the whole world through Twitter, Facebook and the like. It is too easy to blame technology when all those things require us to make a decision to take an action. But there is surely something about the instant nature of communication technology and the culture it helps to enable that drives our behaviour. We convince ourselves that we must respond straight away to any contact. Why? Because we can. This was not possible before when we used the phone after 6pm because it was cheaper. People sent each other letters, often in the second class post. And when people went travelling around Europe/the world- a friend told me that he did this recently- they used telegrams to reassure their parents back home that they were safe after three weeks of no contact!
I type this as a self-diagnosed iPhone, iPad and Twitter-addict and someone who have a thirst for constant news and sport updates. But I also say this as someone who as each year goes by realises that most things can wait, no-one should be so important that waiting a few minutes to speak to them won't be a problem and that we should we dictating our emails not allowing them to dictate to us. Even before coming to these conclusions, even my addiction to instant communication has not moved into the little boys' room!
New technology can be empowering but we should use it to make our lives easier and our communication quicker, not to be so intrusive as to follow us everywhere.
Sunday, 28 April 2013
Friday, 19 April 2013
Manners at the dentist
I made that trip that fills most of us with dread today; I went to the dentist. This is my second visit in a week after a healthy (or unhealthy!) break we've been taking from each other.
I wanted to reflect briefly on the build up to today's reunion. In the hour before my appointment, I treated my teeth and gums to a thorough clean and floss. I'm not a dentist but I'm pretty sure that won't have been enough to take care of any problems he subsequently found. By the way, I need a crown!
So why did I do it? Guilt? Partly. But also a sense of politeness. Surely it is right that I present my mouth in the cleanest condition for the dentist who must see some pretty rotten things. That is just good manners. But it got me thinking. Where will this end?
Doing your hair before going to the hairdressers? Cleaning your car before its MOT? Hoovering the house before your cleaner arrives? Getting better before heading to the doctors? I hope you will agree, these are some of the great questions of our time!
In a week of unspeakable awfulness, especially in Boston, and in hearing that we lost one of the great campaigners and even better Mums in Anne Williams, writing these brief scratchings made me smile. I hope my dentist appreciate my smile too.
I wanted to reflect briefly on the build up to today's reunion. In the hour before my appointment, I treated my teeth and gums to a thorough clean and floss. I'm not a dentist but I'm pretty sure that won't have been enough to take care of any problems he subsequently found. By the way, I need a crown!
So why did I do it? Guilt? Partly. But also a sense of politeness. Surely it is right that I present my mouth in the cleanest condition for the dentist who must see some pretty rotten things. That is just good manners. But it got me thinking. Where will this end?
Doing your hair before going to the hairdressers? Cleaning your car before its MOT? Hoovering the house before your cleaner arrives? Getting better before heading to the doctors? I hope you will agree, these are some of the great questions of our time!
In a week of unspeakable awfulness, especially in Boston, and in hearing that we lost one of the great campaigners and even better Mums in Anne Williams, writing these brief scratchings made me smile. I hope my dentist appreciate my smile too.
Monday, 15 April 2013
And the sun shines now
24 years ago today the lives of many changed forever. Ninety-six men, women and children went to a football match in Sheffield and did not return. Their deaths brought a darkness over their families, friends and many others in Merseyside and across the world. That darkness looked like it would never lift, as though it would hang over us all forever. But the families of the ninety-six never stopped fighting for justice, even though there must have been days they feared that a golden sun would never arrive. That changed this year. All changed. changed utterly.
There are so many incredible moments and images from this last year; seeing the smiling faces of the families as they left the safe space of Liverpool Cathedral on the day the world heard what they had always known about their loved ones; Everton's wonderful tribute at Goodison (hard to type that without spilling tears onto the keyboard); the humility of Margaret Aspinall as she collected an award for her courage and campaigning and dedicated it to everyone but her, and the quiet satisfaction of hearing people who doubted us for so long accept the truth in offices and cafes, pubs and on trains, in conversations up and down the country.
As has been said so many times this last year, the truth is now out. The time for justice has come. On that terrible day, the great BBC radio broadcaster, Peter Jones, tried to do the impossible and sum up the events he had witnessed. He ended his report with the words "and the sun shines now". For the first time since that day, he could be right.
There are so many incredible moments and images from this last year; seeing the smiling faces of the families as they left the safe space of Liverpool Cathedral on the day the world heard what they had always known about their loved ones; Everton's wonderful tribute at Goodison (hard to type that without spilling tears onto the keyboard); the humility of Margaret Aspinall as she collected an award for her courage and campaigning and dedicated it to everyone but her, and the quiet satisfaction of hearing people who doubted us for so long accept the truth in offices and cafes, pubs and on trains, in conversations up and down the country.
As has been said so many times this last year, the truth is now out. The time for justice has come. On that terrible day, the great BBC radio broadcaster, Peter Jones, tried to do the impossible and sum up the events he had witnessed. He ended his report with the words "and the sun shines now". For the first time since that day, he could be right.
Saturday, 13 April 2013
Ladies first
My wife and I conducted an experiment this week. Not the most scientific one ever but nonetheless interesting.
We have recently noticed a disturbing trend when visiting restaurants. Whenever we go out for dinner and ask for the bill it is invariably given to me. When we leave a card on top of the bill, it is assumed it is my card and the pin machine is passed to me to complete the payment.
Now we know the clocks changed recently but we weren't aware we had gone back 50 years! For the record, my wife has a job, her own bank account, and oh yes a PhD! We are not sure if this trend is a gender thing or not but it is very strange.
We hit a new low last night. At the end of dinner we put the card on top of the bill and placed it right in front of my wife on the opposite side of the table from me to make it clear it was hers (the word "Mrs" which appears on the card also helps!). Yet, still the machine was given to me. We pointed out the error. My wife entered her PIN and completed the payment. The machine was then taken by the waiter and the transaction completed. He (btw this trend we have observed is not restricted to men) then handed the card back- yes you've guessed it- to me!
We have not completed our experiment yet- no conclusions to publish- but the results are emerging. We will keep you posted.
We have recently noticed a disturbing trend when visiting restaurants. Whenever we go out for dinner and ask for the bill it is invariably given to me. When we leave a card on top of the bill, it is assumed it is my card and the pin machine is passed to me to complete the payment.
Now we know the clocks changed recently but we weren't aware we had gone back 50 years! For the record, my wife has a job, her own bank account, and oh yes a PhD! We are not sure if this trend is a gender thing or not but it is very strange.
We hit a new low last night. At the end of dinner we put the card on top of the bill and placed it right in front of my wife on the opposite side of the table from me to make it clear it was hers (the word "Mrs" which appears on the card also helps!). Yet, still the machine was given to me. We pointed out the error. My wife entered her PIN and completed the payment. The machine was then taken by the waiter and the transaction completed. He (btw this trend we have observed is not restricted to men) then handed the card back- yes you've guessed it- to me!
We have not completed our experiment yet- no conclusions to publish- but the results are emerging. We will keep you posted.
Wednesday, 10 April 2013
Margaret Thatcher
On my first birthday- 4th May 1979- Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister. In the thirty-four years since, Britain has been shaped more by Mrs Thatcher than by anyone else in peacetime. For good or bad, Mrs Thatcher (she will always be 'Mrs' Thatcher for those of us who grew up in the '80s!) has dominated politics, public policy and public life.
There has been much written and said in the last day or so about Mrs Thatcher the leader, the woman, the bully of colleagues, the dominator of world leaders, the decimator of our industrial base or our mining communities, the Iron Lady. Whatever your view of her, you are likely to have had a view. She was a uniquely polarising politician or leader. There is very little sitting on the fence when it comes to Mrs T.
Before I offer my own reflections (minus the fence), I would like to mention- and it warrants no more than a mention- the vile behaviour we have seen by a small number who have 'celebrated' the death of an 87-year mother and grandmother. This behaviour is a stain on our country. It is disgusting. For those who have this hatred- and that is the only word that fits- it is worth remembering one thing; Mrs Thatcher was able to do what she did in government because she won three elections. She had a democratic mandate. She did not seize power in a military coup or have Jim Callaghan locked in the Tower. The people elected her. Celebrating another human being's death simply demeans those who do it. I will always defend their right to free speech but I also have the right to be appalled by their exercising of it.
So on to my reflections of Mrs Thatcher.
She did stuff. And not just easy stuff, like making speeches and having her picture taken (although she did plenty of that!) but she did important, difficult stuff. All politicians (or wannabe politicians like me!) say they want to 'make a difference'. No one could argue that Mrs Thatcher didn't do that. She made more of a difference than any single politician in our history. Our economy, our society, our political parties and our country have changed beyond recognition since she first walked into No 10. Trade union reform, re-establishing Britain's position in the world and pride in itself, reforming our economy, giving people the chance to break free of state control and own their own home, helping them buy shares and keep much more of the money they earned, totally reforming our failing state industry (her policy of privatisation was copied all over the world), gaining a huge rebate on Britain's contribution to the EU and shifting the argument about its future, retaking the Falkland Islands and helping end the Cold War which if not done could have led to the destruction of this world around us. This list only scratches the surface of her achievements. She has an 'ism' named after her and she built a political consensus which replaced that which followed the 1945 election and still lasts today. John Major, Tony Blair and David Cameron were elected Prime Minister because they positioned themselves as the heir to Thatcher. They owed their political success to the fact that they embraced and accepted her legacy.
She was a leader. Whether you agreed with her or not, you could not question her capacity to take a position- sometimes an unpopular position- and see it through. This courage is admirable in any leader but to see it in this leader who followed several Prime Ministers who had started off as radicals and then gradually retreated in the face of adversity is especially impressive. Mrs Thatcher stood her ground and delivered against the odds. She did not shirk the big calls. She had bottle. Never more so when she emerged from a near death experience in Brighton in 1984. Against advice, she said we would not be bowed. She led from the front, arriving on time and taking to the conference platform to deliver a speech that was every ounce about courage and leadership. It was business as usual. It was extraordinary.
She was respected around the world. The international reaction to Mrs Thatcher's death has been incredible. World leaders, former world leaders, opponents and supporters all have taken time out to pay tribute or reflect on her life and work. I have been reading newspapers from around the world over the last 48 hours and her death is huge news. Why? Because outside of her domestic impact she had huge impact on the world stage. Especially as a women- the most high profile, powerful woman of hers or frankly any other generation in memory. She was a major player in ending of the Cold War and the bringing together of the two greater superpowers (remember that word!). She was a colossal figure. Love or loathe her; from Russia to Rotterdam, you could not ignore her.
She was lucky in her enemies. She fought two of the most unelected Labour leaders of all time; a windbag and a donkey jacket. She was able to defeat the NUM as much because of the hideousness of Arthur Scargill than because of her own skill. The 'loony left' was so out there that it made her appear more reasonable. General Galtieri made the mistake of underestimating her. A mistake that cost our two countries many lives. Her political enemies so often destroyed themselves and played into her hands.
She was full of contrasts. This is a women with lots of grey areas; not always black and white. She was anti President Reagan's Star Wars in private but hugely supportive in public. Unionist in Ireland but signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement, handing powers to Dublin. Hugely Euro-sceptic but a massive champion of the Single European Act and the enlargement of the Community. A women of principle (some would say dogma) but pragmatic to get stuff done. An advocate of 'sound money' but responsible for the biggest credit boom in history (until recently!). I spent the first 21 years of my life in Liverpool. I know first hand the damage that some of her policies did to my city. But she was the Prime Minister for the whole of the UK not one part of it and even though it hurt, it was necessary. She was what Britain needed. She was right for her time, not necesarily for all times. Too many previous governments had bottled the big choices because of the pain and political risk. Until her. By the way, the real and lasting damage to Liverpool and places like it were done by the Derek Hattons of this world not the Margaret Thatchers.
She will be remembered. This week, The New York Times ran the headline; 'Margaret Thatcher Dies; Remade Britain'. Britain was on its knees in 1979. The oft-quoted 'sick man of Europe'. But in truth the patient wasn't just sick but dying. Her prescription didn't always taste good but the patient needed it. Our recovery to full health, built on by governments since, was only possible because of her.
Her impact is and will continue to be massive. Her legacy- good and bad- will be with our country, our continent and our world for generations to come. This week, our great nation lost a great leader, our greatest in peacetime. She made a difference. She united. She divided. She won. She lost. She made big calls. She made mistakes. She remade Britain. She is gone now, but will never be forgotten.
There has been much written and said in the last day or so about Mrs Thatcher the leader, the woman, the bully of colleagues, the dominator of world leaders, the decimator of our industrial base or our mining communities, the Iron Lady. Whatever your view of her, you are likely to have had a view. She was a uniquely polarising politician or leader. There is very little sitting on the fence when it comes to Mrs T.
Before I offer my own reflections (minus the fence), I would like to mention- and it warrants no more than a mention- the vile behaviour we have seen by a small number who have 'celebrated' the death of an 87-year mother and grandmother. This behaviour is a stain on our country. It is disgusting. For those who have this hatred- and that is the only word that fits- it is worth remembering one thing; Mrs Thatcher was able to do what she did in government because she won three elections. She had a democratic mandate. She did not seize power in a military coup or have Jim Callaghan locked in the Tower. The people elected her. Celebrating another human being's death simply demeans those who do it. I will always defend their right to free speech but I also have the right to be appalled by their exercising of it.
So on to my reflections of Mrs Thatcher.
She did stuff. And not just easy stuff, like making speeches and having her picture taken (although she did plenty of that!) but she did important, difficult stuff. All politicians (or wannabe politicians like me!) say they want to 'make a difference'. No one could argue that Mrs Thatcher didn't do that. She made more of a difference than any single politician in our history. Our economy, our society, our political parties and our country have changed beyond recognition since she first walked into No 10. Trade union reform, re-establishing Britain's position in the world and pride in itself, reforming our economy, giving people the chance to break free of state control and own their own home, helping them buy shares and keep much more of the money they earned, totally reforming our failing state industry (her policy of privatisation was copied all over the world), gaining a huge rebate on Britain's contribution to the EU and shifting the argument about its future, retaking the Falkland Islands and helping end the Cold War which if not done could have led to the destruction of this world around us. This list only scratches the surface of her achievements. She has an 'ism' named after her and she built a political consensus which replaced that which followed the 1945 election and still lasts today. John Major, Tony Blair and David Cameron were elected Prime Minister because they positioned themselves as the heir to Thatcher. They owed their political success to the fact that they embraced and accepted her legacy.
She was a leader. Whether you agreed with her or not, you could not question her capacity to take a position- sometimes an unpopular position- and see it through. This courage is admirable in any leader but to see it in this leader who followed several Prime Ministers who had started off as radicals and then gradually retreated in the face of adversity is especially impressive. Mrs Thatcher stood her ground and delivered against the odds. She did not shirk the big calls. She had bottle. Never more so when she emerged from a near death experience in Brighton in 1984. Against advice, she said we would not be bowed. She led from the front, arriving on time and taking to the conference platform to deliver a speech that was every ounce about courage and leadership. It was business as usual. It was extraordinary.
She was respected around the world. The international reaction to Mrs Thatcher's death has been incredible. World leaders, former world leaders, opponents and supporters all have taken time out to pay tribute or reflect on her life and work. I have been reading newspapers from around the world over the last 48 hours and her death is huge news. Why? Because outside of her domestic impact she had huge impact on the world stage. Especially as a women- the most high profile, powerful woman of hers or frankly any other generation in memory. She was a major player in ending of the Cold War and the bringing together of the two greater superpowers (remember that word!). She was a colossal figure. Love or loathe her; from Russia to Rotterdam, you could not ignore her.
She was lucky in her enemies. She fought two of the most unelected Labour leaders of all time; a windbag and a donkey jacket. She was able to defeat the NUM as much because of the hideousness of Arthur Scargill than because of her own skill. The 'loony left' was so out there that it made her appear more reasonable. General Galtieri made the mistake of underestimating her. A mistake that cost our two countries many lives. Her political enemies so often destroyed themselves and played into her hands.
She was full of contrasts. This is a women with lots of grey areas; not always black and white. She was anti President Reagan's Star Wars in private but hugely supportive in public. Unionist in Ireland but signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement, handing powers to Dublin. Hugely Euro-sceptic but a massive champion of the Single European Act and the enlargement of the Community. A women of principle (some would say dogma) but pragmatic to get stuff done. An advocate of 'sound money' but responsible for the biggest credit boom in history (until recently!). I spent the first 21 years of my life in Liverpool. I know first hand the damage that some of her policies did to my city. But she was the Prime Minister for the whole of the UK not one part of it and even though it hurt, it was necessary. She was what Britain needed. She was right for her time, not necesarily for all times. Too many previous governments had bottled the big choices because of the pain and political risk. Until her. By the way, the real and lasting damage to Liverpool and places like it were done by the Derek Hattons of this world not the Margaret Thatchers.
She will be remembered. This week, The New York Times ran the headline; 'Margaret Thatcher Dies; Remade Britain'. Britain was on its knees in 1979. The oft-quoted 'sick man of Europe'. But in truth the patient wasn't just sick but dying. Her prescription didn't always taste good but the patient needed it. Our recovery to full health, built on by governments since, was only possible because of her.
Her impact is and will continue to be massive. Her legacy- good and bad- will be with our country, our continent and our world for generations to come. This week, our great nation lost a great leader, our greatest in peacetime. She made a difference. She united. She divided. She won. She lost. She made big calls. She made mistakes. She remade Britain. She is gone now, but will never be forgotten.
Friday, 29 March 2013
Sorry seems to be the hardest word
I was struck again last week- when reading about the problems at Standard Chartered with the forced apology of its Chairman- that the language of ‘sorry’ is so important. As with all things in life, for something to have impact, it has to appear authentic. That authenticity is about both the sentiment behind it and the words used.
Time and again, you hear someone ‘issuing an apology’ and yet it sounds the opposite of an apology. Why? It often has to do with the words they are using. An apology is meant to be something personal. It is meant to convey a personal sense of regret and often asking for pardon, forgiveness etc.
Using words like 'regret' and 'error' rarely work as they appear too formal and out of the textbook- not personal enough. Another oft-used and oft-failed trick is adding hyperbole. "I apologise sincerely" or "with deep regret". This merely highlights the formal word that is being used and so often it doesn't hit the spot. It sounds like the politicians non-apology apology- and we know how sincere politicians can appear to be.
"I am sorry this happened"....."I regret any offence caused" etc etc. What this really means is I am apologising but not really. I know I have to but I don't mean it! People see through it right away. The passive voice does not work- it has to sound like the person saying the words not a third person or a robot!
The secret to an authentic apology is a) to get the words right and b) most importantly to mean it! On the words, it has to be personal. It has to sound like the person apologising is actually apologising. Like most things in life, keeping it simple is the key; "I am sorry" is a good place to start.
Time and again, you hear someone ‘issuing an apology’ and yet it sounds the opposite of an apology. Why? It often has to do with the words they are using. An apology is meant to be something personal. It is meant to convey a personal sense of regret and often asking for pardon, forgiveness etc.
Using words like 'regret' and 'error' rarely work as they appear too formal and out of the textbook- not personal enough. Another oft-used and oft-failed trick is adding hyperbole. "I apologise sincerely" or "with deep regret". This merely highlights the formal word that is being used and so often it doesn't hit the spot. It sounds like the politicians non-apology apology- and we know how sincere politicians can appear to be.
"I am sorry this happened"....."I regret any offence caused" etc etc. What this really means is I am apologising but not really. I know I have to but I don't mean it! People see through it right away. The passive voice does not work- it has to sound like the person saying the words not a third person or a robot!
The secret to an authentic apology is a) to get the words right and b) most importantly to mean it! On the words, it has to be personal. It has to sound like the person apologising is actually apologising. Like most things in life, keeping it simple is the key; "I am sorry" is a good place to start.
Sunday, 10 March 2013
Vince Cable; wise man or panderer?
In my eyes, Vince Cable has never been the wise sage of the economy that others portrayed him. This was apparent again recently when hearing his pronouncements on the need for "Plan A+"; slow down the deficit reduction effort and increase borrowing. This plan-a naked bit of political grandstanding in advance of his party's Spring conference- is not worthy of the name. It is simply pandering to his Party's worse instincts. These instincts are driven by the fear of what will happen in 2015 if the Government's tough medicine for the economy continues to give the public a sickly feeling. But, it remains the only show in town- something Mr Cable's Party leader understands- pay down the debt, clear up the mess left by the previous government and hold firm.
This long term strategy may pay off politically by 2015 but if it doesn't it will still have been the right thing to do. Mr Cable would do his standing with sceptics like me better if he put his country before his Party. For me, this recent episode supports the suspicion that Mr Cable appears happier opposing than governing. That he is better suited to commenting on, rather than shaping events. It also appears he is not fully versed in the conventions of collective Cabinet responsibility. This is the work of a political panderer not an economic wise man. And alongside that, it is very, very tedious.
This long term strategy may pay off politically by 2015 but if it doesn't it will still have been the right thing to do. Mr Cable would do his standing with sceptics like me better if he put his country before his Party. For me, this recent episode supports the suspicion that Mr Cable appears happier opposing than governing. That he is better suited to commenting on, rather than shaping events. It also appears he is not fully versed in the conventions of collective Cabinet responsibility. This is the work of a political panderer not an economic wise man. And alongside that, it is very, very tedious.
Sunday, 3 March 2013
Communicating directly with the people
The President is continuing his strategy of talking directly to the American people to make his case for key policies. He has done this on gun control, the economy and most recently on Friday on the so-called "sequester". This is a smart move but it carries risk.
He is of course a wonderful communicator and being able to get his message across to the people without it being filtered by the news networks and his opponents in Congress has merit. The downside comes when his actions do not match his fine words. The longer it goes with the President not delivering his agenda- frustrated by Congress- the more he becomes the lame duck that all second term Presidents fear. Every time he goes on TV to outmanoeuvre the Republicans, he makes it less likely he can deliver a deal with them. His approach is producing improved poll ratings but so far no big breakthroughs. If he wants policy as well as political success he must not over-play his hand.
He is of course a wonderful communicator and being able to get his message across to the people without it being filtered by the news networks and his opponents in Congress has merit. The downside comes when his actions do not match his fine words. The longer it goes with the President not delivering his agenda- frustrated by Congress- the more he becomes the lame duck that all second term Presidents fear. Every time he goes on TV to outmanoeuvre the Republicans, he makes it less likely he can deliver a deal with them. His approach is producing improved poll ratings but so far no big breakthroughs. If he wants policy as well as political success he must not over-play his hand.
Whose nation is it anyway?
Friday was St David's Day as one of my colleagues reminded me by bringing Welsh cakes into the office. It got me thinking about nationality and the labels we place on people.
I was born in Oxford Street, Liverpool (just like John Lennon- I fear the similarities end there!). Like many Scousers I have Irish grandparents and Irish family. I am married to a wonderful woman from County Tyrone in Northern Ireland, where we married before crossing the border into the South for our reception and the start of our honeymoon and married life together. Growing up, I spent many, many happy times visiting Scotland and Wales. I have lived in the United Kingdom throughout my life, working in Europe, seeing for myself how this country has become more integrated with its European neighbours and more European in its culture and outlook. I have travelled throughout the world, including spending a lot of time in the United States. Oh, yes and my surname is the most commonly-used in Wales!
What does all this mean? I would argue that it means that the world we live in is a small one and getting smaller by the year. That the old labels and boundaries we once imposed have become less obvious and less important. I would argue that one's nationality or sense of who we are is not as clear cut as it once was or was seen to be. That we are influenced by many, many things, not just where it says on our birth certificate we were born.
I am very comfortable with the following statements; I am extremely proud to be from Liverpool. I am extremely proud to be British (I believe that the United Kingdom is the best place in the world to live and grow up). I am extremely proud to be Irish (I support Ireland when they play England at Rugby- sorry Mr Tebbit!). I extremely proud to be a European. I am extremely proud to be an Atlanticist.
I do not see these statements as conflicting. I see them reflecting the many influences I have been fortunate to have had on my life. The richness of life. Putting people in boxes or placing labels on them may make us feel comfortable and give us some certainty but it does not reflect the complexity of modern life. This world is more grey than black and white. We should embrace that. We should celebrate the wonderful diversity of the these increible islands and this wonderful world.
So hapus Dydd Gŵyl Dewi to all my Welsh fellow British Europeans. I look forward to making similar toasts in 14 days, in Mid-April and in late November.
I was born in Oxford Street, Liverpool (just like John Lennon- I fear the similarities end there!). Like many Scousers I have Irish grandparents and Irish family. I am married to a wonderful woman from County Tyrone in Northern Ireland, where we married before crossing the border into the South for our reception and the start of our honeymoon and married life together. Growing up, I spent many, many happy times visiting Scotland and Wales. I have lived in the United Kingdom throughout my life, working in Europe, seeing for myself how this country has become more integrated with its European neighbours and more European in its culture and outlook. I have travelled throughout the world, including spending a lot of time in the United States. Oh, yes and my surname is the most commonly-used in Wales!
What does all this mean? I would argue that it means that the world we live in is a small one and getting smaller by the year. That the old labels and boundaries we once imposed have become less obvious and less important. I would argue that one's nationality or sense of who we are is not as clear cut as it once was or was seen to be. That we are influenced by many, many things, not just where it says on our birth certificate we were born.
I am very comfortable with the following statements; I am extremely proud to be from Liverpool. I am extremely proud to be British (I believe that the United Kingdom is the best place in the world to live and grow up). I am extremely proud to be Irish (I support Ireland when they play England at Rugby- sorry Mr Tebbit!). I extremely proud to be a European. I am extremely proud to be an Atlanticist.
I do not see these statements as conflicting. I see them reflecting the many influences I have been fortunate to have had on my life. The richness of life. Putting people in boxes or placing labels on them may make us feel comfortable and give us some certainty but it does not reflect the complexity of modern life. This world is more grey than black and white. We should embrace that. We should celebrate the wonderful diversity of the these increible islands and this wonderful world.
So hapus Dydd Gŵyl Dewi to all my Welsh fellow British Europeans. I look forward to making similar toasts in 14 days, in Mid-April and in late November.
Sunday, 24 February 2013
The Pope's legacy
I'm nearly two weeks into my chocolate and biscuit free Lent. So far so good, with the occasional slice of Victoria Sponge to help me through. But my sugar-related abstinence is not the story of this pre-Easter period. Instead it is the abdication- I prefer this word as it gives it the historical significance it deserves- of the Pope. The Holy Father. The leader of over 1 billion Catholics around the world.
The is not an analysis of his Papacy or a discussion about where the church needs to go from here- although an end to celibacy, allowing Priests to marry and ending the sickening discrimination against our gay brothers and sisters would be a start- this is a brief reflection on his decision to stand down. A decision that I believe will be his lasting legacy to the Church.
I declare an interest first. I like Pope Benedict (not just because we sort of share a name). I have always viewed him as a quiet, humble and thoughtful man. No, I don't agree with every one of his thoughts but I respect him. He showed on his visit to Auschwitz and to the UK a gentle kindness which runs country to his cartoon-like media image. He seems to me like a man who cares about others' feelings.
Looking at his recent decision, it is surely inconceivable that watching the last Pope fading before his eyes didn't leave a deep mark on Benedict. To see the most active, well-travelled and charismatic Pope of all time reduced to a frail figurehead damaged the church and left it looking cruel. Making him endure the suffering of his illness in public with little dignity was an awful spectacle. The job- for that what's it is- of Pope is so demanding and requires amazing reserves of health, strength and stamina. I would argue that it has become even more the role of a major world as well as spiritual leader, with a constant need to show leadership and respond to social, economic and political challenges, let alone provide the spiritual leadership which the role demands. To do this in your eighties, with the inevitable fading of strength and health, is nearly impossible.
By stepping down this Pope has said loud and clear that the job of Holy Father needs to be done not just by someone chosen by God but someone who can work for more than a few hours a day. Someone who can fly around the world and not take a week to recover. Someone who can stand up and speak for more than a few minutes at a time. And someone who can provide the visible leadership and connect with people on issues such as child abuse, gay marriage and AIDS. Pope Benedict has said, I am not that person. He is also saying that whoever gets this job next, it is not their for life. He has enacted a major reform leading inevitably to informal term limits on Popes and a focus on his ability to walk the walk as well as talk the talk. It is not the big social reform of the Church many of us want. It is not an end to some of the worse attitudes of intolerance towards others we crave but it will prove to be a legacy that will make every Pope from here on it younger, fitter, more in touch with modern life, and more able to tackle those big issues that remain a millstone around the Church's neck.
The is not an analysis of his Papacy or a discussion about where the church needs to go from here- although an end to celibacy, allowing Priests to marry and ending the sickening discrimination against our gay brothers and sisters would be a start- this is a brief reflection on his decision to stand down. A decision that I believe will be his lasting legacy to the Church.
I declare an interest first. I like Pope Benedict (not just because we sort of share a name). I have always viewed him as a quiet, humble and thoughtful man. No, I don't agree with every one of his thoughts but I respect him. He showed on his visit to Auschwitz and to the UK a gentle kindness which runs country to his cartoon-like media image. He seems to me like a man who cares about others' feelings.
Looking at his recent decision, it is surely inconceivable that watching the last Pope fading before his eyes didn't leave a deep mark on Benedict. To see the most active, well-travelled and charismatic Pope of all time reduced to a frail figurehead damaged the church and left it looking cruel. Making him endure the suffering of his illness in public with little dignity was an awful spectacle. The job- for that what's it is- of Pope is so demanding and requires amazing reserves of health, strength and stamina. I would argue that it has become even more the role of a major world as well as spiritual leader, with a constant need to show leadership and respond to social, economic and political challenges, let alone provide the spiritual leadership which the role demands. To do this in your eighties, with the inevitable fading of strength and health, is nearly impossible.
By stepping down this Pope has said loud and clear that the job of Holy Father needs to be done not just by someone chosen by God but someone who can work for more than a few hours a day. Someone who can fly around the world and not take a week to recover. Someone who can stand up and speak for more than a few minutes at a time. And someone who can provide the visible leadership and connect with people on issues such as child abuse, gay marriage and AIDS. Pope Benedict has said, I am not that person. He is also saying that whoever gets this job next, it is not their for life. He has enacted a major reform leading inevitably to informal term limits on Popes and a focus on his ability to walk the walk as well as talk the talk. It is not the big social reform of the Church many of us want. It is not an end to some of the worse attitudes of intolerance towards others we crave but it will prove to be a legacy that will make every Pope from here on it younger, fitter, more in touch with modern life, and more able to tackle those big issues that remain a millstone around the Church's neck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)