CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

A Christmas story today: part of Chapter One of the second of my four children’s adventure books, The Travels of Wiglington and Wenks.

It comes about because Wiglington and Wenks decided to give a Christmas Party when they returned from France with the first of the Carto Wiglington Maps. They wanted to say ‘thank you’ to all the people who had helped them find their heritage and start on the journey of discovering the maps treasures. They are halfway trough the party…

It must have been around midnight when they were startled by a noise coming from the far side of the barn. It sounded as though someone heavy was moving about and, given their recent experience of the Batpack, they were nervous as to who it might be.

Mr. Ruthless and RatGuard grabbed two long brass pokers from the fireplace, took a torch and set about finding out what was going on. Sir Ordy Nance wanted to go too, and Wiglington said he did, but the guard from SecuriRat said they should stay where they were.

It was an anxious few moments before Mr. Ruthless and RatGuard returned grinning from ear to ear.

“Come with us,” said Mr. Ruthless, in between chuckles as he led the way.

The light was quite dim, but with the help of the torch they could see that there was something moving around in the corner of the barn. They went nearer and there, Lo and Behold, trying to get onto its feet was a tiny new calf. As they approached, it stopped struggling and lay still, gazing at them with its big brown eyes.

They gathered round while the calf’s mother looked proudly on, munching contentedly on the hay and giving a low, gentle moo every now and then as though to say, “See how clever I am!”

Wenks suggested that they should sing a song of welcome for the new arrival because a baby is the most miraculous thing that can happen. Mr. Ruthless and RatGuard make an arch over the calf with their pokers and they all sang quietly so as not to disturb the creatures.

While they were singing, the door of the barn opened very gently and some of the villagers peered in.

Wiglington was surprised to see them at this time of night, and all dressed up too. Villagers usually went to bed early or fell asleep in front of the television.

Mr. Ruthless put the torch out because it was quite light now. The night sky was clear and there was a very bright star twinkling overhead.

Even Mr. Crosstik was there with his son, and they both took their caps off as they came in.

Everyone was very quiet and for a few moments it seemed for all the world as though man and creature were one.

Somewhere in the distance, a church bell rang out.

It was a perfect end to the evening.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

“Rats are not naughty, they are nice and caring: US Research” said a headline in the press a couple of days ago. I knew it! But I seem to have been a bit ahead of my time when I wrote the four children’s books The Travels of Wiglington and Wenks some twenty years ago. About two educated Water Rats who travel the world in search of their ancestor’s priceless living maps, they show the good side of many creatures whatever their species.

As David Attenborough pointed out to me, Water Rats are not really rats at all, they are voles, a quite different animal; Sir David has a thing about rats. Whatever species we talk about there is much to be learnt from them. In particular, the great array of creatures that have human characteristics without the supporting human brain. The social order of meerkats, the powerful monogamistic tendencies of swans, the apparent ability of elephants to mourn a death in the herd, the productive response of cows who give more milk when they hear good music, especially, apparently, the baroque composer Vivaldi. Cows have very good taste.

All is not good and light in the animal kingdom, of course. There are inherently nasty animals. They are often the species changing their nature or habitat in response to loss of places to live, shortage of the essentials of life or challenges posed by competing species. Most threatened animals will defend themselves and their families.

Common to virtually all species is the predominant importance of survival of their species. Notwithstanding this natural priority, thousands of species become extinct every year. Survival and renewal are often defeated by developments beyond the species ability to handle change. A reason for mankind’s successful survival has been the ability to adapt to the changing environment – the doubling of both the world’s human population and the average life expectancy in less than a century is evidence of dramatic ability to cope with – and plan for – change.

Rats are a long-surviving species. Like the cockroach, they may well be here long after the human race has disappeared. Perhaps we should take their, seemingly new-found, caring seriously. Are they preparing to run a social order humans seem to be incapable of getting right just now? They have been shown to prioritize releasing fellow rats from bondage before indulging in food they are known to favour.

Dr Peggy Mason, University of Chicago, the kindly researcher who reported these helpful findings about rats concluded that if rats can be so caring and helpful “there’s a sense of optimism. It’s something we could be”.

You can say that again, Dr Mason.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

Hot on the heels of what many consider the FSA’s inadequate fine of HSBC for mis-selling products to old and vulnerable people (http://www.terrificmentors.com/2011/12/a-fine-profit/) is the report on the disastrous failure of the Royal Bank of Scotland and its rescue, funded by the British taxpayer. This time the Financial Services Authority admits that its supervisory scheme “provided insufficient challenge to RBS”. They didn’t ask enough of the right questions. The FSA’s Chairman says so.

Several people have written to me saying that you cannot expect the FSA to get tough with the people who pay them. This scenario of regulators being paid by the people they are regulating is widespread. Come to think of it, it is just what you want of your regulator – to have him somewhat in your pocket. He is unlikely to bite the hand that feeds him.

Most auditors are paid by the people they are auditing. That presents a massive conflict of interests. No auditor wants to lose a client so he will do as much of what the client wants as he legally can. In some cases like Enron, beyond legally, too. It is exactly ten years since the Enron scandal. It caused the dissolution of one of the big five accounting firms, Arthur Anderson, Enron’s auditors. What has been done since then?

The Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 tightened corporate governance in the United States but did not change this basic conflict of interests. Many other countries adopted legislation similar to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act including Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Australia, India, South Africa, and Turkey. Corporate governance undoubtedly received much more attention post Enron but fundamental principles of regulation have still not been widely accepted. In light of recent financial turmoil is it not time that they were?

There are also areas beyond business where these principles apply. In education, for example, the concept that a teaching body awards marks for its own pupils’ exam results leaves it vulnerable to the temptation to “mark high” thus providing proof of its success. There is no better way of attracting the next intake of students.

In considering a new moral code (http://www.terrificmentors.com/2011/11/a-new-moral-code/) these areas of conflict should be comprehensively addressed not to create more and increasingly complex procedures but to make certain that the judge is above corruption. If the legal profession can do it, business, education, medicine and other professions can do it too.

Today we have the means of transparency in communications. Let us use them better.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

Today I have invited my good friend, Sandy Oh, banker and entrepreneur,

to contribute some thoughts on ‘When you and your employer have two

different Trees’. She says:

Targets! Forecasts! Reviews! Team Huddles! It is that time of the year when management gathers the workers, stirring their spirits to achieve ever higher targets in the New Year.

I often wonder how many employees are genuinely inspired by their boss’ call to arms and sometimes farcical team-building exercises. In public, many play – or have to play – the rah-rah game and appear enthusiastic and fired up. In private, the reality is often markedly different.

Why is there such a big disconnect between personal and corporate vision? Why is it so difficult to excite employees to be truly inspired by their companies’ goals?

John’s groupies and followers of The Daily Paradox know the importance of identifying one’s Tree. When you work in an organization whose Tree bear little resemblance to yours, it is easy to understand the disconnect. How can you be totally engaged in your job if your employer’s goals don’t resonate with your deepest desires?

How and why do we end up in this state of dissonance? I suspect the answer lies in why people join and stay in a company.

They do so for many reasons; for money, prestige, experience, exposure, the people, survival, the company’s vision. Visionary companies and leaders pursue objectives over and above making money. A company’s strong vision and culture act as a self-selecting mechanism. When you get a marriage between two entities who share the same vision, you have a higher chance of staying together in matrimonial bliss.

Money, a basic reason for work, is a weak force for true inspiration and stickiness.

As with marriages, partners and their priorities evolve and change during their union. When that happens, dissonance can occur. An organization that understands the importance of helping its employees fulfill their sense of purpose and that works hard at integrating it in planning their careers is best positioned to bridge the disconnect.

Many play lip service to this; few are good at implementing it.

As an individual, the clearer you are about your Tree, the more determined you are to head towards it, the less likely you are to end up out of step with your environment.

Those less clear risk muddling through life.

Thank you, Sandy. Important thoughts, especially at a time

when the whole basis of the relationship between employer

and employee is under scrutiny.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

HSBC have been fined £10.5M for mis-selling products to elderly patients in UK care homes, some of whom were not anticipated to live the five years to maturity of the investment. The average age of the buyers was 83.

If you think this is a justified penalty, I disagree with you.

Look at the figures. 2,485 customers were sold the products and the UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) judged that the products were unsuitable for 87% of them – 2,162 “clients” – well, that is what the bank calls them. A total of £285M was invested in the products, an average of £115,000 per client. Thus, the 87% mis-sold clients invested a total of about £248M. So, for an investment of £10.5M HSBC has netted £237.5M – I call that a pretty good return, don’t you?

Ah, the bank may say, but there is more than that to it – we are now expected to have to pay out another £29.3M in compensation. So the bank’s investment was actually £29.3M + £10.5M – a total of £39.8M. That is what it cost them to remove £237.5M from elderly, dying patients. That is still the best return I have seen for a very long time.

So the question is why has the FSA decided to announce – one might even say promote – this highly lucrative form of mis-selling, with its phenomenal returns? Is it a signal to other banks to do likewise? Are we being told that mis-selling is the new form of marketing and that everyone should learn it? Or is the FSA appraising us of a new, and yet-to-be-endorsed, moral code?

Then again, is HSBC any longer a secure haven for funds? Surely a bank that does what it has just done is not instilling confidence into clients? We will all be old one day, in need of financial advisers and support that we can trust. And there’s the rub, Trust. One profession or one branch of a profession breaks a client’s trust and, in the process, damages all the other’s reputations. Maybe you no longer trusted banks anyway?

But the Financial Services Authority – that’s another matter. Independent, governed by the strictest rules, reporting to Parliament, it must surely be the epitome of propriety and legality. That is a reasonable assumption, anyway. So why is it pussy-footing around an issue of obvious, blatant dishonesty by the biggest bank in Europe? As the FSA puts it “We are operationally independent of government and are funded entirely by the firms we regulate”. Ah!

There have been riots in Greece, Italy, USA, Germany, and many other countries at the attempted removal of social benefits for which people have worked and saved and which they have been promised. Two European Prime Ministers have fallen over the issues.

And the FSA is fining HSBC one twentieth of the profit it has made from mis-selling?

Do me a favour.

Click to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

Memories of childhood Christmases bring tears to my eyes. They were a mixture of sentiment – beautiful carols, memorable church services, emotional broadcasts by a kindly but extremely shy King – and discomfort, bordering on disaster – dysfunctional home, wartime deprivations, a vague and unspecific sense of loss. “Compulsory fun; all will enjoy.”

Even with all that, I was luckier than most. Has Christmas improved since then?

Obviously there are fewer deprivations for many people. They have mostly been replaced by excesses. The music has got even better. Young, and not so young, musicians and singers have a quality that was rare seventy years ago. Food has got consistently worse with pre-packed everything and seldom a cook’s special touch. I was fortunate recently; the chef in Mezza9 prepared a meal specially and wow! that brought back memories of the very best of home cooking. I am still luckier than most.

So what is Christmas – or any other religious or secular festival – for? A chance to catch up with family and friends, an opportunity to chill with a loved one, perhaps a time to reflect on the past year and contemplate, and prepare for, the year ahead? Or maybe a celebration of life, a ticking of mortality’s clock, a nod to a possible though unproved creator, a recognition of the inherent spirituality of human beings?

It is all these things and more. It makes us think of other people, of friends, of those about whom we care. It prompts us to consider the reasons for our being here at all, why we do what we do and how we might do it all better. Many attend a church service that would never do so at any other time. They want to pray for others and for themselves. Often they do not know how.

So here’s a thought for Christmas – come to think of it, for any time at all.

A prayer is not a litany of ritualized mantras. It is a thought, however fleeting, for someone else, for their wellbeing, for their happiness, just for them. It needs no words, no urgent purpose. We do not have to know the person for whom we have the thought. The only criterion for a prayer is that it is for someone other than ourselves. A nanosecond of prayer is as good as any long, formal service, though the gathering together of like-minded people is in itself desirable.

No deity is required for a prayer, no deeply held belief other than the understanding that our fellow beings are immensely valuable whatever their shortcomings and foibles. We do not need an All Bran approach to prayer; it can come and go as we please. We need not spend money on prayer; a thought is free.

The Christmas card I have made this year is pictures of people’s faces of all ages and backgrounds. The words:

May your God be in the eyes of the people you meet,

in the thoughts of those you love and

in the hearts of all who love you

So, in between the feasting and the fun, all of which should go ahead full-tilt this Christmas, spare a thought now and then for someone.

You have no idea how much good it can do them – and you.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

Supervision of funds given for charity does not seem to have improved over the last few years. Stories of blocked, misappropriated and misspent monies given in the wake of natural or man made disasters proliferate. Now animal rights groups are claiming that funds given to Japan to help the victims of the tsunami have been allocated to protect whaling vessels. Claims have been made that money given for the December 2004 tsunami was not available to those in need.

Church contributions have also come in for criticism. Some ‘religious’ bodies have amassed huge bank accounts and invested the proceeds in property and shares instead of immediately helping the poor. It has got to a point where many are reluctant to give, even though they want to, because they fear their money will go to the wrong people.

Christmas is a time when extra calls are made on the purses of those who have a little more than what they immediately need. There are so many deserving causes; it is difficult to know who should receive and how to ensure that the intended end user gets the benefit. We need to know with more certainty that our money is going to the right place and not being diluted along the way to line the pockets or lifestyles of others.

While hesitating to recommend the use of existing bodies to play a more key part in this, it does seem to be a job for the United Nations. They are in a position to know what demands there are on the world’s charitable abilities; they should be able to exercise a discipline over the protection and distribution of the money. Donors must always be able to identify the cause to which their money will go but the UN can also point out needs of those whose demands result from the less well publicised events.

The better side of human nature leads us to want to help our neighbour. There is a good Samaritan lurking in everyone’s personality. It is, unfortunately, easily discouraged, especially by the thought that our money is being wasted. We do not need that; we are perfectly able to waste it ourselves. Can we have more confidence that the good cause to which it is going is the one we intended it to go to?

If we could be assured of that we might all dig a little deeper into our pockets.

Happy Giving.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

While respectfully congratulating the Belgians on getting a new government after 540 days without one, we cannot but feel that many voters in other parts of the world – even, conceivably, in Belgium – would have liked the opportunity to get rid of their governments, if not for 540 days then forever. It is, after all, some considerable time now since a government anywhere made good decisions – in some cases any decisions, good or otherwise. Perhaps administrations would benefit from a prolonged absence of parliamentary democracy, giving them time to clear past extravagances and set right the priorities for social and economic common sense. After all, no votes, no need to purchase votes with offers of increased welfare benefits.

Clearly such an idea is preposterous. Since there is no representation without taxation the reverse must also be true. How appalling if we were all to face an absence of taxes even for the comparatively limited period of 540 days. Eighteen months tax holiday would surely cause much neurosis, bringing with it guilt so cunningly taught into our consciences by those used to taking the annual tax collection. The situation would surely give rise to a spike in demand for psychiatrists’ couches and awesome herbal remedies purporting to induce dream-free sleep.

Nevertheless, conscience is a malleable commodity and with proper consultative help and disciplined practice I suppose there is a possibility that citizens might learn to accept the idea with comparative equanimity, provided, always, that work of adequate length and complexity was available to fill the gap caused by the absence of tax return forms and the attendant accounting.

Given the economic woes currently caused through inconsiderate saving by nervous consumers it might be possible to lure the shopper back to market to help buy our way out of threatened recession. Coupons – maybe called Tax Holiday Tokens (THT) – might be provided to stimulate spending, with new honours medals struck for those whose extravagance exceeded the recommended minimum.

With an inability to pass new legislation the cry of caveat emptor might again be heard, even taught in schools and universities. Whole populations could once more become responsible for themselves, freed from the burden of first voting for, and then being obliged to support, members of parliament. At times when a parliamentary election would have been due, celebrations could be held instead with stalls available to make use of THTs specially printed for the occasions.

New life would be bred into developing countries excess production capacity. A period of politician-free, prolonged growth could follow. I am afraid it is unlikely to happen. To those whose 540 days glimpse of this version of paradise has been cut short we send our commiserations.

It was worth a try.

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

China‘s security chief has warned that the government needs better methods to deal with social unrest due to a slowing economy.

“It is an urgent task for us to think how to establish a social management system with Chinese characteristics to suit our socialist market economy,” 

            If the problem of social management is pressing the Chinese authorities they are not alone. Indeed, throughout the world we have increasing signs of social unrest. These have been precipitated by several things. Economic downturn leads to job losses and nobody likes that.

Our economic structure, whether in China or elsewhere, is not geared to dealing with job losses. The growth model of the world is finite but politicians – and voters – have deluded ourselves that it can somehow go on forever, just as we pretend that the planet can handle an increasing population, whatever size it grows to. Stark facts are facing people now and it is leading to social unrest.

What could have been done to avoid this? Under a democratic parliamentary system, and even a socialist market economy, expectations are bound to be raised too high. No politician is elected for telling unpalatable truths. It takes a war for a political leader to get away with offering ‘blood, toil, tears and sweat’ to a population as Churchill did in 1939. Today, our leaders must offer more security, less work, an easier life, if they want to be elected. And they must offer it instantaneously. “I want it now” is not just a song, it’s a religion.

What should we do now to create a social management system? Water canon is not the answer, though it is better than side-handled baton charges. First we must include economics of the world in our education system at every level. At present education is promoting consumption and acquisition. It must change fundamentally to promote conservation and fairer distribution of the world’s goods. Limits to what is acceptable for an individual or a state to possess have to be agreed sooner or later.

Second, we must review the democratic, financial and commercial processes to make them take a longer and less volatile view. A world where over 80% of stock market trading is algorithmic demonstrates that the capitalist system has overtaken the humanist system. We are only a few steps away from total digital control. Nobody is explaining the consequences of that.

Third, we must live up to our oft-repeated statement that money isn’t everything. I know some who do and they are very happy. Success is still measured in terms of wealth. We must find and promote better criteria than that.

Above all, we must help people to understand that a fulfilled life involves helping others more than it involves helping ourselves. The concept of a rounded life seems to have gone almost totally out of the window. It has been replaced by the idea that happiness is the sum of fun things done for ourselves.

Can we use our persuasive talents to show that it is the sum of fun things done for others?

CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

One of my correspondents uses the phrase “speaking out of both sides of the mouth”. While not attractive it is descriptive. It was what my correspondent said about the French President’s comment that there should be strict control over Europe by France and Germany but that France would not surrender its sovereignty.

Could Jacques Delors be speaking out of both sides of his mouth when he says:

“Whether we like it or not, we are part of the West, and the West could possibly lose its leadership, and it is important that we preserve the values that matter not only to Europe, but to Britain and the United States — the values that are Judeo-Christian in origin — Greek philosophy and Greek democracy and Roman law, and the Age of Enlightenment and the French Revolution.”

For those too young to have known of him, M Delors was the architect of the Euro. He used the grudgingly-passed Maastricht Treaty to transform a perfectly good European Economic Community into the European Union. The British Prime Minister at the time didn’t like it.  The inspired but vulgar phrase to which it gave rise in the tabloid press was “Up yours, Delors”.

M Delors now says the Euro was flawed from the start. OK, so we get things wrong sometimes; but this is a mighty big thing, enough to put the world into recession as bad as 1930.

If Asia and the United States do not think this affects them, they are wrong. The west is the big consumer of the cheaply-produced products of the east. China, India and the rest of Asia are building their economies and one day they will be substantially self-sustaining; they are not there yet. Indeed, China, in particular, faces the uncomfortable problem that while GDP grows at around 10%, personal incomes – on average – do not grow at all. Bearing in mind that many individuals in China are getting very rich the position of the poor is dire.

The gap between rich and poor is disgraceful everywhere. The rate at which that gap is growing in China is cause for concern.

M Delors latest statement is true. The west is fast losing its economic leadership. However, Europe is still the cultural centre of the world and preserving that culture becomes daily more important as we struggle to balance powerful, rapacious economic forces with the need for spirit and life purpose.  We cannot at one moment say money isn’t everything and then behave as though it is. That is not just both sides of the mouth; it is both sides of the brain.

How would further compulsory merger of the EU countries preserve that heritage? Not at all, I suspect. Two disastrous world wars, precipitated by a wish to control Europe, failed to merge the different cultures. Mercifully, Europe has been without war for sixty years. Forced integration could precipitate the third, but it would probably be economic and social, not military. The riots that ensue from attempted removal of sovereignty may, however, be very military and bloody.

What is happening is as much about life’s fundamentals as about the value of the Euro.