Hong Kong's three child dream

25 February 2005

In a desperate sounding ploy to tackle the declining birth rate and the burden of providing financial security for an aging population, Chief Secretary for Administration Donald Tsang has urged each Hong Kong family to have at least three children.

The man is more out of touch than I realised.

In the meantime he seems to see a role model in Singapore where the Social Development Unit -SDU (Single, Desperate and Ugly) seeks to ensure that Chinese graduates breed with Chinese graduates and maintain the gene pool.

Tsang incidentally is widely considered to be the liking successor to Tung Chee-hwa as Chief Executive of Hong Kong.

Teaching an old dog new tricks

22 February 2005

The last time I had a golf lesson I was a teenager in Nigeria and the pro there told me to take a divot; out of ground that resembled baked concrete.

Thirty years later I am playing golf regularly for the first time in my life. Living in Hong Kong and Singapore it was hard to get a regular game. And in Canada I had to hibernate for six months of the year.

In Thailand I have invested in new clubs, new bag and new putter. Having the equipment is one thing; knowing what to do with it is very different.

I have been playing to a 14 handicap through the last year; not consistently but with some memorable moments and some decent scores.

But I want to play better - and I want a single figure handicap.

So it is back to school. An American teaching professional, Doug Hood has set up a school and driving range on top of the Dusit Hotel car park. His video of my swing was a shocker - I really thought I had a better swing than that ! Although I knew I had a very strong right hand as part of a two fisted grip.

So we have agreed to change my grip and rebuild my swing.

After one lesson and some practice yesterday all I can say is that at this time my hands hurt; the swing feels totally unnatural and I have no idea where the ball with go.

Over the next month you can follow progress on my blog. Maybe I can persuade Doug to send me a few then and now pictures as well.

India versus China; the old argument but with new answers

21 February 2005

For many years India was viewed from outside as a country that was failing to live up to its potential. Those Indians who were successful had succeeded overseas and stayed there. In 1986 India and China shared the same per capita GDP of US$275 per annum. Since then Chinas GDP has tripled while India has moved at a comparative crawl.

A quarter century ago, India and China were on similar economic footing. They have grown remarkably, but not equally. India's GDP is about $500 billion. Compared with other countries, this is small. China's GDP, for example, is two and a half times that of India.

China has also far outpaced India in attracting foreign direct investment to drive her growth. The official numbers are about $50 billion a year to China. India on the other hand is around $4 billion or $5 billion a year, which is around one-tenth the foreign investment as China.

The question for many outsiders looking at China and India is which country will be the dominant economic, political and military force in Asia over the coming decades. The answer has regularly been China; fuelled by her massive foreign direct investment, political and economic ambitions, a compliant population and internal growth.

Arriving in Shanghai or Bombay could not be more different. From the new Pudong airport to Shanghai is a journey by Maglev rail track or a drive along gleaming highways past the advertisements of rampant consumer demand. There is no expressway from Bombay airport. It is a grim one hour (on a good day) drive through an overcrowded city past some depressing shanty towns.

But long term success needs more than structures and highways.

At issue also is the type of society that is being built; the foundations that are not concrete but are about knowledge, creativity, enterprise and finding a place in the world that demands respect not fear.

Both China and India are full of very enterprising people who are also increasingly well-educated and politically ambitious. Both countries think they deserve more attention on the world stage.

China has positioned herself as the world's leading manufacturer and fastest growing consumer market. India leads the world for business processing and as an IT service provider. China's massive lead in FDI comes in part form the capital intensive nature of many of the investments that have been made.

China offers cheap labour and a massive domestic market. India has a well educated workforce, experienced management talent, transparent laws, cultural and language affinity  and a more familiar regulatory environment.

Growth has also meant more capital available for improvements in infrastructure, another area in which China leads and India languishes.

But what do these gains mean in the longer term; environmental degradation, inequalities of income and political or social instability exist in both countries. But India's income distribution is less skewed than in China; its pollution less severe; its environmental damage less pronounced and its political institutions more secure. Indians can parent another child; they can enjoy diverse religious faith; they can and do protest regularly at anything and everything.

India has a well-established, independent judiciary. Indians enjoy freedom of expression, democracy, and a vibrant media. And English is the language of business in India; it is widely understood and used throughout the country. For foreign investors normal business risks are tempered by the presence of independent courts, politicians, and a free-speaking media.

This democracy is not all good - it also means a sometimes slow and well-entrenched bureaucracy. But rights and freedoms are good for economic and social progress. They make markets more fair and open; they make leaders accountable and give people a stake in change; just witness last years election win by the Congress Party to see how people can make change happen and how a country adjusts almost seamlessly to moving ahead under new leadership.

Both India and China need foreign investment. For now, the balance of money for manufacturing is going to China, while India is getting more than its share of highly skilled, white collar work. This may be India's great advantage. It is easy to teach people to make something and to do it again and again. But that is not giving people knowledge and more sustainable skills. India is also able to rely upon a robust private sector to move its economy forward and has less reliance upon FDI.

Indians have successfully established international businesses run from home or overseas. The Indian diaspora have never run away from their homeland, not in the way that the Chinese have left never to return. Indian business people also believe in "guangxi" but they have developed their networks internationally not just nationally.

Does this mean that India and China are competitors for global influence? Perhaps at the moment their relationship is marked by rivalry. I do believe that Western commentators are re-assessing their views of India. In the longer term enlightened leaders may see that, as North America has NAFTA and Europe the EEC, it is possible one day for India and China to combine to form an economic juggernaut rivaling any in the west. In many ways they are far more complementary than competitive.

Million Dollar Movie

21 February 2005

Million Dollar Baby is about a woman determined to make something of herself, and a man who doesn't want to do anything for this woman, and will finally do everything.

It is not a boxing movie although the movie is about a boxer and her manager and trainer. It is a movie about life, respect, choices, survival and adversity.

There is no last minute triumph. The movie moves from the ring to another fight for dignity. This film demands time for reflection and contemplation afterwards. The film both affirms life and emphasizes its fragility.

The 77th Oscars: this film should earn all the major honours: Best film, best director, best actor and best actress.

Boeing vs Airbus; battling for the long haul.

16 February 2005

In the last month Boeing and Airbus have both revealed new aircraft that they argue represent the future of long haul travel.

Airbus' vision is the A380; a double decker four engine monolith seating over 500 in a three class configuration up to potentially 800 in an all economy charter configuration.

Boeing meanwhile launched the 777-200LR yesterday. A long range version of its successful 777 two engine product. The 777-200LR will fly non stop from London to Sydney, a bum numbing 19 hour flight that would eliminate the technical stop in say Dubai, Bangkok or Singapore. However, the prevailing winds will not allow it to fly non stop back from Sydney to London.

But many commentators miss the point that the real battle is not between the A380 and the 777-200LR. The Airbus competitor in the long haul race is the A340-500 launched one year ago. Singapore Airlines flies the A340-500 under the "Leadership" tag from Singapore non stop to both Los Angeles and New York. Thai Airways will be launching a similar 17 hour ordeal to New York on 1 May 2005. SQ probably called the market correctly here. The long long haul non stop market is a premium business product where people want to hit the ground and start work. SQ flies with only a Business Class and a Super Economy class configured 2-3-2 instead of the usual 2-4-2 on the A340, with 37 inches of leg room and with a quality entertainment product; The super economy product is priced about 10% higher than standard economy..

17 hours in a standard 30 inch high density economy product would be unbearable for most people.

The new Boeing is a derivative of the Boeing 777 where Boeing have taken out some of the fuselage and increased the size of the wings and the engines to get another 1,000 miles or so in range. With a reduced payload it will have relatively high operating costs and fits a niche market.

The A380 meanwhile will fly the same routes as aging 747s. It offers much reduced operating costs and greatly increased capacity. For the leisure and family passenger who wants cheap fares and are flying from major congested hub airports the A380 will be the way to go.

Hide; it's Valentine's Day tomorrow

13 February 2005

I wish I could spend all of tomorrow locked up in my apartment with the telephones off; without internet access, without going to work and all alone.

I really do not like Valentine's Day. I am not very romantic; I will admit to that.  I do know how to be; I just do not see why it has to be forced upon us with such ardour every 14th February.

I like a good dinner; some music, a nice bottle of wine; a movie; a play; a long walk by the sea; a weekend away, even a trip to the spa. But the rampaging consumerism and attendant vulgarity of Valentines Day is just too much !

The card companies make a fortune; Interflora and other florists suddenly and dramatically raise the price of flowers; restaurants insist that you have to have special meals with appallingly named erotic or exotic food. And the amount of trash sold in the shops is alarming, garish lingerie; heart shaped chocolates and all sorts of plush toys. 

Yet strangely we all want to be loved and it is on this day that we are supposed to declare that love and wear it openly for all to see.

Why to we want to be loved? Maybe it is passion; at least at the start. But it has more to do with having someone at our side who measures and often guides our progress along life's highway. It has so much to do with a sense of belonging; of being a part of something that is important.

In part that must be due to how we grow up. We almost all grow up within a family; some with two parents, some with one parent; some with new parents; but we belong to that unit. That unit loves us, nurtures us, watches us grow; heals us and cares for us and then sets us free.

As we get older we leave that family unit and for a while we face the big world without that same certainty. We study, find jobs, earn an income; meet and date and slowly build new relationships of our own. We share intimacies for the first time that can bond us together.

Relationships and marriage used to be in part expectation and in part obligation. Increasingly in our modern world we seek out soul mates; we follow our heart with all the risks that entails. We often place unrealistic expectations on our partner. Our affluence and materiality hurt modern relationships. Despite being wary of commitment and leaving marriage until later in life we are still too ready to abandon that which we need most; the love and support that a true love can bring.

Valentine's Day trivialises genuine love; With the right person every day should be your own Valentine's Day.

Charlie and Camilla to have a grey wedding

10 February 2005

Finally in Britain the ultimate in grey marriages!

On Friday 8 April the heir to the British throne, Prince Charles, will marry his lover of the last thirty years, Camilla Parker-Bowles.

Another drain of the poor old British tax payer Camilla is known to enjoy the more expensive things in life; after they marry she will be known and Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Cornwall. When Charles becomes King Charles III she will not be known as the Queen but as the Princess Consort. It must have taken many, many hours of debate to sort out the constitutional issues.

The British Royal Family is such a soap opera; it is like watching aging actors who still have lead roles in Coronation Street.

Generally people will wish them well. They clearly are happy with eachother and have been for a very long time. But they are also both totally out of touch with the real world and real people. Camilla will never want to be, and can never be, the people's princess that Diana represented.

Diana made the British Royal family human and accessible. Camilla and Charles represent privilege and wealth.

Skydome becomes the Rogers Centre

7 February 2005

The Toronto Skydome, home of back to back World Series wins by the Toronto Blue Jays in 1992 and 1993, is to be renamed the Rogers Centre, its corporate parent has announced.

Thaksin's landslide (2)

7 February 2005

Prime Minister Thaksin heads into his second term in office with an overwhelming mandate to rule. He needs no coalition. Thai Rak Thai appears to be heading for 375 of the 500 parliamentary seats; including 32 of 37 seats from Bangkok.

It is only the South of Thailand that rejected TRT. This will become a major and potentially divisive issue for the second term. The overwhelming TRT support in the rest of Thailand indicates support for the TRT's strong arm policies in the South; the lack of support in the South suggest high levels of disaffection.

Two surveys in Thailand indicate that all was not well with the democratic process as candidates spent nearly 10 billion baht (US$260 million) to buy their way to victory in a campaign marked by corruption, gambling and vote-buying. The Electoral Commission is toothless.

One of two polls by Bangkok's Assumption University showed that more than one in three respondents believed massive vote buying was among the greatest concerns for the election.

Vote-buying and other corrupt practices have marred past balloting in Thailand despite efforts in recent years to curb such tactics by an Election Commission and non-government organizations.

Prime Minister Thaksin said last week that "only a buffalo would spend (billions of baht) for an election. My party has the advantage and there is no need to buy votes."  Yet on Wednesday night last week family members of a friend were offered Baht 200 each by TRT campaigners for their vote. Some families in the same village were apparently holding out for Baht 500 each.

Thaksin has a fabulous mandate. The biggest question of the next few years is how he uses that mandate. With greater power comes greater responsibility.

**************

2Bangkok.com has an interesting analysis of why Thaksin succeeds.

Thaksin's landslide

4 February 2005

His effective management of the Tsunami crisis has removed any lingering doubts about Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's coming landslide win in Sunday's general election in Thailand. There are 500 seats in the legislature; Thai Rak Thai could win as many as 350. With political allies in other parties and a likely slew of defections the opposition voice would be quiet indeed.

Frankly the opposition voice deserves to be quiet. There is no evidence of leadership. There appear to be no clear policy alternatives.  The Thai economy is booming again. Unemployment is low; incomes are rising.

Thaksin's CEO talents make him want to run the country as he sees fit without the checks and balances of an effective parliamentary opposition. The opposition parties do not expect to win. They have resorted to pleading for enough seats on parliament to still be heard.

Thaksin has led from the front; he has worked hard for the country, the country has benefited. And so, argue his critics, have the companies that he and his family own  through Shin Corporation.

The concern that many people have is that to get things done Thaksin ignores, or over rides, the very institutions that are put in place to provide balance. There is little respect for the Electoral Commission and the Constitutional Court.

Thaksin understand well that popularity matters in Thai politics; as long as people believe they are benefiting then they will stay loyal to the hand that feeds them. Thai Rak Thai's base is largely in the rural communities; but a second term plan for road and mass transit construction and other mega projects could win the hearts and minds of the capital as well.

My greatest wish is that he would lead a forceful drive that eliminates corruption throughout Thai society; that invests in education; that defends human rights; that rewards good management and that does not tolerate bureaucratic inefficiency or incompetence, that provides clear transparency between political actions and business benefits.

Voting is a privilege; use it wisely.

2046 - ravishingly self indulgent.

3 February 2005

Ravishing visuals, stunning outfits, Faye Wong and Zhang Ziyi; lovingly filmed, strong classical soundtrack. But in the end too slow, too clever for its own good and simply not engaging.

Wong Kar Wei and long time collaborator cinematographer Christopher Doyle spent four years making this film and their attention to detail is clear. It is a lovely film to look at; each frame appears thought through. But is it really necessary to spend a minute lingering on a slow motion shot of Faye Wong puffing on a cigarette. Everyone smokes in this film.

There is a story there somewhere. Tony Leung's character in his voice over sums up the moral of the tale as being that "Love is all about timing. It is no use meeting the right one at the wrong time or in the wrong place."

Zhang Ziyi gets the best role and the best dresses; and she pouts beautifully. Faye Wong looks as cool as ever. But there is no emotion in her role at all. Just lots of long, wistful silences. Faye also gets to play a robot attendant on a futuristic train. l

Maybe this will help (or not): "There is a need in all of us to have a place to hide or store certain memories, thoughts, impulses, hopes and dreams," says Wong Kar-wai. "These are the parts of our lives that we can't resolve or act upon, but at the time, we are afraid to jettison them. For some, this is a physical place; for others, it is a mental space, and for a few it is neither."
 

Taking political correctness to extremes

1 February 2005

The English Football Association, which has been frequently abused on these pages, recently released an official DVD of England's greatest post-war internationals. The DVD, entitled The Pride of the Nation, has been included in a welcome pack for newcomers to the "Englandfans' official members" club.

The FA is quite entitled to choose a top 20 list. But what happened was the FA's original list was then give to a production company for final selection and editing. The initial list given to video producers Octagon was understood to have included black players but none of them made the final cut when the running time was reduced to 30 minutes.

There are 17 players included in the 30 minute production, including Bobby Moore, Gary Lineker, Bobby Charlton, Paul Gascoigne, Alan Shearer, Bryan Robson, David Beckham and Terry Butcher. However, Martin Peters, Chris Waddle, Stuart Pearce and Steven Gerrard were also included.

But black players such as Rio Ferdinand, Sol Campbell, Paul Ince, John Barnes, Ashley Cole and Viv Anderson - who in 1978 became England's first black international - were overlooked.

Now, following several complaints, the FA is now set to produce a new DVD featuring black players; the old dvd is withdrawn and anyone who received it will also be sent a letter of apology.

FA head of communications Adrian Bevington said: "The FA is fully committed to promoting diversity in all areas of the game and in society. "We regret and apologise for any offence that may have been caused due to a lack of black player representation on this DVD.

For the FA to then rescind the video simply looks crass.

John Barnes, a black player who appeared 79 times for England and who many might have included, said this weekend "I would never put myself forward as one of the 20 best of all time," said Barnes. "To redo the DVD and put black players in just makes the situation worse. How many will be enough? One? Two? Three? It's like giving a black actor an Oscar just because you think a black actor should get one and not because they gave the best performance. It's ridiculous, it's political correctness gone mad."

John Barnes was a fantastic winger for Watford and then Liverpool. And I loved watching him play. But would he make a list of England's top 20 post war players. Probably not.

Indeed one English national newspaper in the 1980s ran a campaign to sack Bobby Robson as England manager expressly because he continued to pick Barnes.

Predictably, the same newspaper was on its high horse printing an England team of black 'greats' last week.

David James was in goal. Shaun Wright-Phillips, who hasn't been in the England squad more than two minutes, was included. Neither would be in any list of top twenty post war players.

Maybe Des Walker, Sol Campbell and Rio Ferdinand are close to this list.  but they are not quite there yet. And I would take Barnesy over Chris Waddle any day.

But ask 20 fans and you would get 20 different lists. That's what football opinion is all about.

 The FA is entitled to its own view; but once given could at least have the balls, of whatever colour, to act decisively.

The final word and some simple commons sense on this subject comes from John Rawling and John Barnes in yesterday's Guardian.

Barnes isn't worried, why are we?

John Rawling
Monday January 31, 2005
Guardian

Every football fan should be able to name their favourite goal. For me, the best goal ever scored for England came in the huge Maracana Stadium in Rio de Janeiro back in 1984. John Barnes, then a young Watford winger, dribbled his way past Brazilian defender after defender as if the ball were tied to his toes before slotting home the most breathtaking of goals. Barnes never quite emulated that moment, but who could have done? It was a simply sublime stroke of footballing genius.

And if I were to wind up on a desert island, assuming it is not deemed politically incorrect to say so nowadays, I could take an FA video and watch that Barnes goal against Brazil for ever.

Democracy's wedge

31 January 2005

Something remarkable happened yesterday for over 8 million people. They voted to choose their government. The majority of those eligible to vote in Iraq did just that. Despite the threat of death or attack. Despite huge military presence and body searches before voting. Despite in many cases long walks to and long waits at the limited number of polling stations.

Across the Middle East you can almost hear the sound of squirming leadership; if democracy take a firm hold in Iraq, it could have a significant, if unpredictable, impact on such neighboring countries as Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran, all of which are run by autocratic regimes. Their leaders have now seen elections embraced by Afghans and Iraqis. The political changes in the Middle East could be turbulent, troubling and for many euphoric.

The issue for the new Iraqi leadership is to maintain the strength of democracy; freedom, choice, accountability, responsibility.

Having come this far to go back now would be to fail the 8 million who voted yesterday. That must be unthinkable. To support the process of change will require foreign troops. It would be better if this were a UN led force. But whoever is there needs to be there because the elected government wants them there and needs to be accountable to that government.

The daily suicide attacks will not suddenly stop. The bombs wont go away; at least not yet. The future difficulties are huge. But there can be no going back. The US, the UK and yes the UN as well owe that to these 8 million people.

If Iraqis are to maintain their belief in the election process, it must move the country towards the things that they want and have voted for. That means Iraqis running their country and the US troops committing at an agreed time to leave. Democratic nations are not occupied nations. The Americans more than any country really should understand that.

It was a hopeful day; it needs momentum and it needs co-operation. An established democratic government in Iraq could be a clarion call to the Middle East.

*****************************************************

The following first hand account is from the Toronto Star. The Star is no fan of the Bush administration; it is a moving account of one family's vote: