The competitive demise of Hong Kong

30 September 2005

The World Economic Forum has just published its Global Competitiveness Report for 2005. Led by Finland, with the USA in second place and Sweden and Denmark in 3rd and 4th followed by Taiwan and Singapore.

The Hong King government threw a major hissy fit when they fell seven places to 28th. Instead of a measured response to say that there are serious issues being addressed in Hong Kong the SAR government simply chose to say that the WEF got it wrong.

I know another nation (oops,I am living in it) that makes a habit of not responding well to perceived or real criticism.

The rankings are drawn from a combination of hard data together with an Executive Opinion Survey carried out by the World Economic Forum and a network of partner institutes. 11,000 business leaders were polled in 117 economies. The comprehensive survey questionnaire is designed to capture a broad range of factors affecting an economy's business environment. Particular attention is placed upon elements of the macroeconomic environment, the quality of public institutions which underpin the development process and the level of technological readiness and innovation.

Hong Kong's dramatic fall is attributed to a weakening in perceived judicial independence, the protection of property rights and in government favouritism in policy making. Hong Kong's ranking in irregular payments (corruption) has also fallen significantly.

The HKSAR government immediately issued a press release stating that  the World Economic Forum’s accusation of weakening in Hong Kong's judicial independence, property rights protection, and a rise in favouritism in government decisions and corruption is ungrounded.

So who is right? The Hong Kong constitution, the Basic Law, states that 10 years after 1997, the city may reform it's political system as it wishes. No change so far.

It also says a new Chief Executive serves for five years. Well, Donald Tsang is serving for two.

Hong Kong law does not interpret constitutional issues; its ends them upstairs to the People's Congress in Beijing.

Huge sums of public wealth have been transferred to property tycoons, Richard Li, Disney and dozens of construction and engineering companies in exchange for no apparent net benefit to Hong Kong.  Hong Kong Cyberport, Disney and the West Kowloon site all come to mind.

Simplistically one of the most obvious changes in the Hong Kong economy arise from China allowing large numbers of new visitors to enter Hong Kong, many loaded with cash. The city and its business recognise this economic change. And the economic change has turned the property market around. People began to feel wealthy again. That underpins confidence in Hong Kong. But it is beholden to the mainland economy and to a different set of rules.

Chine is in 49th place in the WEF survey. It is no great surprise to see Hong Kong sliding all too quickly to the level of its new master.

I declare this airport not really open yet !

27 September 2005

The current UN Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan will end his second five-year term on Dec. 31, 2006. He is not expected to try for an unprecedented third.

By then Africa will have occupied the position for the 15 years since Mr. Annan, from Ghana, followed Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt, a country that is part of the African regional bloc at the United Nations.

The Secretary-General is appointed to a five year term. UN Secretaries-General normally spend two terms in office; however, sometimes, they will serve only one. By convention, the position of UN Secretary-General rotates by geographic region. There has not yet been a Secretary-General from North America or Oceania.

There is widespread agreement at the United Nations that Asia deserves the choice this time. The continent's only secretary general, U Thant of Burma, stepped down in 1971. Other United Nations chiefs have come from Europe — Trygve Lie of Norway, Dag Hammarskjold of Sweden and Kurt Waldheim of Austria and the Americas — Javier Perez de Cuellar of Peru.

The Secretary-General is described by the Charter as the "chief administrative officer" of the organization. Originally some felt that the role of the Secretary-General should be purely administrative. But in reality every Secretary-General since has spoken out on global issues and used his good offices to mediate disputes.

Sadly most Secretaries-General are compromise candidates from middle powers and with little prior fame. High profile candidates that have been touted for the job are almost always rejected as unpalatable to some. For instance for the first Secretary-General such figures as Charles de Gaulle, Dwight Eisenhower and Anthony Eden were considered, but were rejected in favour of the uncontroversial Norwegian Trygve Lie. Bill Clinton would suffer the same fate. He might be an ideal and ideological leader and fund raiser for the UN but he is American; and too many nations would not accept both an American UN leader and the fact that the UN remains largely beholden to US funding and support.

No announcement has been made of Annan's successor, but behind the scenes Asian countries appear to be  pushing the candidacy of Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai. Another candidate is Jayanta Dhanapala of Sri Lanka is also considered a strong candidate. Dhanapala is well reputed in UN circles especially for his contribution to disarmament issues.

The Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra has announced that Mr. Surakiart would be his country's candidate, and the Thais have lobbied hard since then to gain wider recognition for the relatively unknown deputy prime minister (one of many deputy prime ministers).

But is it really appropriate that such an influential position should be given to a representative of a country that languishes in equal 64th place in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index 2004.

Mr Surakiart may be a very honourable and wise man. But his position would be beholden to a government that seems premanently immersely in corruption scandals. He is not the man to demand or implement change.

The UN has to break free of taking the path of least resistance. The eternal compromise of the UN should no longer be acceptable. For the UN to have real influence it should be led by a real leader who has had real impact on the global geopolitical agenda. This position sets the tone for the whole operation and visibility of the UN.

Annan's United Nations has presided over the unremitting disasters of Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq and the oil-for-food scandal. Accountability, transparency and, ultimately, success demand a change in the way the UN is led.

King Canute and the internet in China,

26 September 2005

The legend of King Canute is very familiar; a great king sitting on his throne on the beach and commanding the sea to go back. And of course the sea doesn't take any notice. What this proves is that even if he's a king, the powers of nature don't obey his commands.

But, King Canute is misrepresented by common belief. He was not some egocentric fool trying to hold back the sea by his command, but was in fact very modest.

King Canute lived in an age when it was traditional for people to be "subjects" and to pay homage to the monarch, and his followers worshipped him and would say things like "Oh great majesty, the very sea obeys your mighty command". He got so sick of this sort of thing that he commanded that his king's court be moved to the beach and he would PROVE that the sea did NOT obey his commands.

"Go back, sea!" he commanded, and the tide continued coming in as expected. And Canute put it to his courtiers that the sea was NOT obeying him and that they should admit that no king has power to command the forces of nature by word. He insisted they stay there until they admitted it. He risked himself and his court being drowned rather than allow the nonsense to continue. In the end the followers were forced to agree and to state that the king did not have the power to command the sea

The internet has the same force in China as the ocean faced by Canute. It is unstoppable. A more educated, wiser, better  informed, more international nation wants to know the truth, they want to better understand not just their nation but their role in the world. People are wise enough to make their own choices and judgments.

But yesterday the Chinese government through the Ministry of Information Industry and the State Council, issued new instructions to "standardize the management of news and information" in the country. The rules went into effect immediately after they were announced.

The new rules have little impact upon authorised, licensed news outlets but will extend controls to blogs and Internet-only news sites.

But can any amount of intimidation, money and manpower really enable true regulation of Internet content in China. Or is it, like Canute, a losing battle.

September's Amazing Thailand

24 September 2005

One of the challenges for this site will be to find the best possible examples of Amazing Thailand for my loyal reader. My definition of Amazing being the bits of Thailand that people and unlike to find in the traditional Thai guide books. Something a little off the beaten track that raises at least an eyebrow.

Thailand is of course a land of contrasts. There are always surprises to be found; although as a non Thai speaking or reading foreigner it can sometimes be hard to really understand and see all the opportunities that are here.

The contrasts extend to the range of accommodation available throughout the country. Thailand has more than its share of short term hotels; places for consenting adults to go and play! And none may be as amazing as the Red Rose Hotel in Chiang Rai; this has not made it to the Thailand tour books yet; but it looks to be a must visit.

Their English language site is here http://www.redrosehotel.com/main-eng.html. I suspect the cartoon theme rooms are for the inner child in all of us!

One helpful amenity in every room is the wonderfully named Love Love Jel. This comes with helpful instructions as shown on the left!

The web site includes a map and room rates. Reports please!

Getting the JetBlues

22 September 2005

Possibly overheard on JetBlue 292:

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is your Chaplain speaking. As some of you may have noticed we have been flying around in circles for an hour now. The buffeting noise that you can hear is because landing wheels are still down and we are flying flaps down to try to use up as much of our fuel as possible.

Sometime in the next couple of hours we are planning to re-unite you with the earth; although our arrival may be a little unpredictable.

You see folks, the front landing gear, which is supposed to roll forwards and backwards like on any moving vehicles has locked its self at right angles to our direction. The good news is that those of you who have no idea what I am talking about will soon be able to see for yourselves on our live tv screens in the back of your seat, on Fox, CNN or MSNBC. Maybe the squeamish among you should continue to watch the cartoon network or a cooking show. I just hope they are not showing a flaming barbeque.

We are really not too concerned about landing the plane safely although we do ask for your full co-operation with the instructions of our crew.

What we are concerned about is a) the blithering nincompoop tv news anchors (only the ones in the USA; not you and Hugh, Kristie!!) who are going to make this sound like some sort of massive catastrophe and b) the clowns they employ to fly the tv news helicopters all around Los Angeles that we are going to have to weave our way between on approach to the airfield.

Folks let me tell you what you need to know before the media starts its crazy speculation:

We were flying from Burbank to JFK; we have a full fuel load. As we cannot retract the landing gear we cannot get to JFK because the drag of the gear increases our fuel burn.

The A320 does not dump fuel. There is no fuel dump system. Shorter haul jets do not have such systems. So instead we need to fly around for a bit to burn off our fuel.

We wont be going back to Burbank. The runways are too short.

So we will go to LAX which has four long runways and outstanding safety and fire equipment.

Unlike the movies there will not be foam on the runway. We do not want to skid on the foam and end up in Anaheim.

Landing gear problems are not unusual. As we land we may find that the front gear snaps off. It may not. The crew will make sure that you take the brace position. We may need to evacuate the plane immediately after landing. This will probably be more dangerous to your health than the landing itself!

So that's it folks. Our fifteen minutes of fame. The first officer is wishing he had put on a clean shirt. And I am grateful to the hotel laundry for my clean underwear. Now that we are on live TV it is tempting to have some fun and put this baby through its paces. If this was a movie they would be trying g force maneuvers to try and shake the gear back to its correct position. Then the first officer would be expected to dangle by a chord from the undercarriage bay and try and fix the problem with a screwdriver borrowed from the priest in seat 16A. Finally Steven Seigal would be fired by canonball into the maintenance hatch below the plane. 

But we will do this by the book; while we burn some fuel please kick back, wave out of the windows and prepare your biographies for the swarm of media interviews on the ground.

We will talk to you again before we start our descent.

Yahoo's two faced shame: you've got jail

20 September 2005

On 26 September Yahoo is launching its latest new service; www.hotzone.yahoo.com. On this site an experienced and digitally literate reporter, Kevin Sites, is to produce the first news for and financed by, a major all-internet company.

Sites is a seasoned reporter, with a reputation, and scoops to his credit. Yahoo is committing to being an original news publisher. But I wonder if Sites knew that Yahoo is more committed to obtaining favour with repressive governments than to supporting the freedom of information and the safety and security of front-line journalists.

Sites' brief is to travel the world reporting on violent conflicts in ways that will upset some governments, some of the time. Yahoo will be paying his expenses and salary. But based upon Yahoo's treatment of Chinese journalist Shi Tao Mr. Sites may want to ensure he has other friends in the event that he needs a way out of any location. He should also find an alternative email service to Yahoo.

Yahoo's editorial principles are outlined on the web site as:

"We will be aggressive in pursuing the stories that are not getting mainstream coverage and we will put a human face on them. We will not chase headlines nor adhere to pack journalism but vigorously pursue the stories in front of and behind the conflict, the small stories that when strung together illustrate a more complete picture.

We are professional journalists and will apply to our work the ethical code of conduct as outlined by the Society of Professional Journalists: http://www.spj.org/ethics_code.asp

To seek and report the truth.

To minimize harm.

To act independently.

To be accountable.

We strongly believe, as stated in the preamble of this code, "that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy."

Well Yahoo appears to have broken that ethical code of conduct even before the service starts. In April of this year Yahoo  identified a Chinese journalist, Shi Tao, and gave his details to the Chinese police who immediately arrested him, sent him for a non juried trial in front of a judge who convicted him for to jail for 10 years.

Reporters Without Borders in Paris issued a scathing indictment of Yahoo! Hong Kong for sharing Shi Tao's IP address information that contributed to his arrest and conviction. Shi Tao was a reporter for the Contemporary Business News based in Changsha, the provincial capital of Hunan province.

One of the major issues arising is the theme of corporate responsibility in the emerging age of digital human rights.

At what point should Yahoo say no to the Chinese authorities. Yahoo has clearly agreed that in China they must censor some material and searches, but is it acceptable to collaborate with the police to track down alleged dissidents.

As a US company does Yahoo have an obligation to saying that the Company respects certain basic values, universal values, human rights. What Yahoo did was probably legal in China; it probably served the interest of their business, but it was immoral and not ethical.

Further Yahoo gave up Mr. Shi willingly; there was no shred of protest or legal action despite the request being made in Hong Kong which does have courts and a more free media. Would Beijing have backed down if Yahoo had used the Hong Kong media to publicise what it could have claimed was its predicament in being asked for information that could incriminate and imprison a journalist, although it is highly likely Beijing would have backed away if Yahoo had done so.

Worse was to follow from Yahoo who have spent months saying "no comment"; at an internet conference in China a week ago, the Yahoo founder Jerry Yang said:

'We did not know what they wanted information for, we are not told what they look for, if they give us the proper documentation in a court order we give them things that satisfy local laws. I don't like the outcome of what happened with this thing, we get a lot of these orders, but we have to comply with the law and that's what we need to do.''

Then he refused to say more stating "I cannot talk about the details of this case.'' Of course he can talk about it all he wants. It is Mr Shi who cannot.

Yahoo! and other Internet heavyweights jostle for market share in China and the U.S. sectors. Signing up with their Internet services comes with a caveat that your IP address and cookies are collected and made available as public information when required. But clear, easily available answers on what information they provide and the agencies they give it to or would be willing to give it to if asked, is not transparent for the average user.

Yahoo is not alone in putting its business interests before ethical interests in China. Several large multinationals, including Microsoft and Google, have liek Yahoo! been willing to allow China to censor free expression in exchange for profit. Last June, Microsoft began blocking consumers of its new China-based Internet protocol from using such “dangerous” words and phrases as “freedom,” “democracy,” “human rights,” “demonstration,” and “Taiwan independence.” Users who fail to comply get this message: “This item should not contain forbidden speech, such as profanity.”

The newspaper USA Today noted with the bitter irony: “What’s actually profane is a company that built its future on the freedom provided by the American system helping a repressive regime censor such ideas.”

Microsoft is not alone. In 2002, Yahoo! China signed a pledge not to allow the placement of “pernicious information that may jeopardize state security,” while in 2004 Google launched a new search engine in China that omitted sites the Chinese government didn’t like, such as the BBC and Voice of America.

Over the past two decades, many have argued that despite China's authoritarian and sometimes openly hostile government, it is nevertheless right to encourage American companies to work there. Their very presence has been thought to make the society more open, if not necessarily more democratic. But if, in fact, American companies are helping China become more authoritarian, more hostile and more of an obstacle to the promotion of democracy around the world then it is time to rethink the rules under which they operate.

Or is it really simply about profit?

Whither Google

19 September 2005

What to do with the Google war chest. Well one of the rumours running around the markets is that Google might buy Reuters; my ex employer.

Google raised over US$4 billion in a follow-on offering last week.

Google shares came to market in August 2004 at $85 and touched a record high of $317.80 in July. Google stock closed at $303, down $8.68, or 2.8 percent, in regular session Nasdaq trading on Wednesday, ahead of the follow-on pricing.

The $4.18 billion in gross proceeds, combined with the nearly $3 billion in cash and marketable securities on hand at June 30, 2005, amount to a $7 billion fund Google can draw upon for anything from acquisitions to research and development. Google has said it will use proceeds from the offering for general corporate purposes, including working capital, capital expenditures and acquisitions of complementary businesses, technologies or other assets.

With speculation rampant over the Web search leader's next moves, Internet pundits have argued the offering could be used as a war chest to enter markets ranging from Internet video search to a free, ad-supported U.S. wireless network.

Many brokerage analysts have taken a more conservative view, arguing that while Google may use the $4 billion cash pile to fund investments in existing operations, any acquisitions are likely to be for small technology firms.

The Wall Street debate is coloured by the fact that half the analysts who follow Google are restrained from discussing the offering because the firms they work for are underwriters.

Underlying the debate are investor jitters over whether Google must drum up new growth opportunities as revenue growth from advertising dollars, basically all its current revenue, may slow amid fierce competition from rivals including Yahoo Inc.

Where would Reuters fit in: US$ 4.0 billion in annual revenues for a start. Leave the news service intact with the Reuters name and some form of guarantee of its independence. Put Google tools and technology on market traders desk tops. Create a messaging and alert service that traders actually use.

Reuters focus is on four "Core Plus" markets : electronic trading; high-value content; enterprise-oriented selling; and new markets, including products for individual investors and expanding operations in China and India. Reuters argues that the market for electronic trading, for example, is growing at about 15 percent per year.

Where were you when England took back the Ashes?

13 September 2005

My first memory of watching cricket was when I was six years old. I was not very well that summer and was lying at home on the sofa (in Bourneville Lane) to be precise; on the black and white TV the West Indian pace bowlers Hall and Griffiths were being thumped around by the imperious Ted Dexter. No helmets in those days.

My first century was off my brother's bowling in the back garden. My father used to come out of work and take me to the evening session at Warwickshire's Edgbaston ground. We even did a behind the scenes tour. I played a little school and club cricket - not well but always enjoyably. I have watched England play cricket in England, Australia, the West Indies (Antigua - wonderful !!) and India.

I saw Botham's Ashes on TV in 1981. I watched Lillee and Thomson terrorise Mike Denness' team. Dennis Amiss was never the same player after that tour.

But this is different - this will not be someone's Ashes; this is a collective Ashes. This is a win for a team not a person. Someone always made an impact when needed.

A great series; hugely competitive and played in great spirit. It is good for England as a country, it is good for cricket, it is good for sport! England win the Ashes for the first time in 16 long years.

For the rest of my life and many decades still to come people will ask eachother where were you when England regained the Ashes in 2005.

You can follow this link to a series of press articles to relive this day.

Hong Kong Government aids Mooncake Munchers

12 September 2005

While the US Government flounders in its efforts to look after its own people while messing around in the affairs of others the Hong Kong government continues to establish truly remarkable levels of concern for public welfare.

In 2004 the HKG government issues the following press release on tips for eating mooncakes safely. Since the autumn festival is one week away it is time to reproduce this wonderful example of nanny-state bureaucracy in all its well intentioned glory:

The link is here. http://www3.news.gov.hk/ISD/ebulletin/en/hkforkids/default/040923/html/040923en50004.htm

Tips on eating moon cakes safely
********************************

    The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) has recently collected 49 moon cake samples for chemical and microbiological tests under its Food Surveillance Programme, the test results are satisfactory.

     Despite satisfactory results, the FEHD reminded the public to be careful when buying moon cakes.
 
     People should buy moon cakes only from reputable retail outlets to ensure the quality of the product, an FEHD spokesman said.

     Consumers are offered a great variety of moon cakes, including fruit, bird's nest, abalone, dried scallop, snowy and ice-cream moon cakes.
 
     Snowy moon cakes, which are becoming increasingly popular, are quite different from conventional Guangdong moon cakes.

     "Unlike conventional moon cakes, which are put in a mould and then baked at about 300 degrees Celsius for 15 to 25 minutes, the ingredients of snowy moon cakes have already been cooked before being put in moulds, and further baking is not required. Therefore, snowy moon cakes are also subject to more stringent temperature control during transportation and storage," he said.

     "Baking can eliminate all bacteria present in conventional moon cakes. In the absence of such a process, snowy moon cakes tend to pose a higher microbiological risk.
"Consumers can, however, enjoy moon cakes safely by observing proper food hygiene when buying and storing the cakes."

     Here are some safety tips for moon cake-lovers:

General tips
------------
* Buy moon cakes from reputable retail outlets;
* Check the expiry dates and eat within the recommended period;
* Check if moon cakes are properly packaged. Individually packed moon cakes can offer additional protection;
* Wash hands before handling and eating moon cakes.

For conventional moon cakes
---------------------------
* Store moon cakes in the refrigerator if they are not eaten immediately;
* Cover and wrap moon cakes properly to prevent cross-contamination during storage.

For snowy and ice-cream moon cakes
----------------------------------
* Make sure snowy moon cakes are refrigerated at the time of purchase. For ice-cream moon cakes, the temperature of the freezer should be kept at -18 degrees Celsius or below;
* After purchase, take snowy or ice-cream moon cakes home immediately and keep them in the refrigerator;
* Never leave snowy or ice-cream moon cakes in the boot of the car, as this could lead to speedy proliferation of micro-organisms in the danger zone of four to 60 degrees Celsius.

When eating snowy and ice-cream moon cakes outdoors
---------------------------------------------------
* Use a cooler with ice when carrying snowy or ice-cream moon cakes outdoors;
* Take moon cakes out of the cooler only when it is time to serve them;
* Discard snowy and ice-cream moon cakes that have been kept at room temperature for more than two hours;
* Bring along wet towels to clean hands if hand-washing facilities are not available nearby.

     The public should eat moon cakes moderately as most of them are rich in sugar and fat. Patients with chronic illnesses should consult dieticians before eating moon cakes.

Mickey Mao and the new cultural revolution

How unlikely is this; well, Walt Disney was a fervent anti-communist and Mao launched deadly purges of rightists and blocked Hollywood films. But both were in many ways fervently conservative and traditional.

Can Disney succeed in Hong Kong. Disney is not a powerful brand in China where more people are more familiar with Japanese animations and manga than Disney. One quotation wonderfully said that "for us Winnie the Pooh is an alien".

State of the Nation

7 September 2005

There is a sense of unease in Thailand at the moment which is hard for a foreigner to interpret. It is probably also either foolhardy or arrogant for a foreigner to comment upon.

But it is real. There are mutterings of May 1992 when the military suppressed a pro democracy demonstrations. There is a considerable debate on Royal powers under the Thai constitution. There is clear disquiet over corruption scandals. 

Yesterday there were over 1,500 attending a forum organised by the Thammasat University Institute of Democracy.

The current debate appears rooted in the attempted removal of Jaruvan Maintaka as Auditor General and the fact that royal confirmation of Visut Montriwat as her successor has not been granted after a three month wait. Jaruvan has served for two years when Thailand's constitutional court declared last year that her nomination and appointment had itself been unconstitutional.

It is unclear how any of this will play out. There is also great frustration at broken electoral promises, particularly with regard to public transit commitments in Bangkok. These were major TRT commitments which have been shed as the economy has slowed and funds have been required for energy and other programs such as the 30 Baht healthcare scheme.

In the meantime The Nation newspaper carried this op-ed piece at the weekend which tells its own story but is in many ways is a summary of the issues that are now coming to the fore in Thailand.

Female Davids take on Goliath  Published on September 04, 2005 The Nation

Three very brave ladies are currently making headlines by displaying unusual degrees of integrity. Three women of different careers and backgrounds have become the biggest talking points in society. All three – an embattled bureaucrat at the centre of a major political crisis, a popular actress who shocked the nation by announcing her pregnancy and a journalist-cum-activist fighting a staggering civil suit by the prime minister’s business empire – are giving this country good reasons for soul-searching, socially and politically.

Their stories are still unfolding, but how they conclude will provide significant clues about where we are heading as a nation. For better or for worse, it’s refreshing to see female names in headlines in a still male-dominated society.

Jaruvan Maintaka and Supinya Klangnarong have shown that with an iron will, otherwise ordinary women can rock Thai politics. They have received strong support but still deserve credit for their determination, defiance and even stubbornness. The former is standing up against major institutions – the Constitution Court, the Senate, the government itself – in a showdown that has exposed flaws in our political system. The latter is fighting for her right to speak out for the public interest and draw attention to the one issue that has hounded Thaksin from Day One – conflicts of interest.

For Jaruvan, her apparently well-connected political enemies raised the issue of her “unlawful” nomination as auditor-general. The Constitution Court ruled in their favour. The Senate followed by proposing her nominated successor to His Majesty the King, only to be met with a deafening royal silence for months now. She has been locked out of her office and her salary frozen, but Jaruvan insists she will leave only upon a royal command. If she wins, what will that say about our political mechanisms?

In Supinya’s case, the prime minister’s business empire is suing her for claiming it benefited unduly from government decisions. On the surface, it appears to be a matter between a “private company” and an alleged accuser, but much is at stake in this ongoing court fight, which involves far more than the obscene amount of money demanded and the political face. The final outcome will tell a lot about our country’s libel-law enforcement, freedom of speech and the haunting question of how much giant businesses closely connected to politically powerful people should be subjected to public scrutiny. Her victory or defeat will have far-reaching repercussions on the increasingly volatile political landscape. The judge’s verdict will prove historic.

If Jaruvan and Supinya are up against almighty enemies, well-known actress and television hostess Kataleeya “Mam” McIntosh faces no less daunting hostility. The strong, largely negative public reaction to her admission that she is four months pregnant raised more questions about society than about her. Again, it’s about an ordinary woman, but one who bears the weight of social expectations on her shoulders – whether that is practical in this day and age or not. Unlike Jaruvan and Supinya, Kataleeya does not stand to lose big money or a major political position. But she must be missing a basic freedom that most women enjoy – the chance to make personal decisions based on a simple thought: “This is my life.”

It’s good to see women making headline news for a change, but one thing is disturbingly noticeable. Why is it that whenever we see women become involved in national issues, they are usually on the receiving end? Why is it always a back-to-the-wall story?

We can only wish the three ladies the best of luck. But for society in general, how much support, apathy or contempt it gives them is the main point.

So far, opinions are divided. Supporters and sympathisers see three brave ladies fighting for their dignity, their principles and simply themselves. Critics say Jaruvan has political motives, Supinya seeks publicity and Kataleeya is a liar.

But one thing is certain: if they were men, they would not have faced accusations or criticism. After all, it’s okay for men to be political, seek publicity and lie about their private lives. Society seems to find nothing wrong with that.

Katrina - first the floods then the fall-out

6 September 2005

America has to sort itself out after Katrina and the destruction of New Orleans. I suspect GW Bush will be untroubled as President. There is no election due until 2008. Bush cannot be impeached for being hopeless. But heads should roll.

This damning piece from Maureen Dowd in Saturday's New York Times says everything that needs to be said.

UNITED STATES OF SHAME

Maureen O'Dowd - New York Times 3 Sept 2005

Stuff happens. And when you combine limited government with incompetent government, lethal stuff happens.

America is once more plunged into a snake pit of anarchy, death, looting, raping, marauding thugs, suffering innocents, a shattered infrastructure, a gutted police force, insufficient troop levels and criminally negligent government planning. But this time it's happening in America.

W. drove his budget-cutting Chevy to the levee, and it wasn't dry. Bye, bye, American lives. "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees," he told Diane Sawyer.

Shirt-sleeves rolled up, W. finally landed in Hell yesterday and chuckled about his wild boozing days in "the great city" of N'Awlins. He was clearly moved. "You know, I'm going to fly out of here in a minute," he said on the runway at the New Orleans International Airport, "but I want you to know that I'm not going to forget what I've seen." Out of the cameras' range, and avoided by W., was a convoy of thousands of sick and dying people, some sprawled on the floor or dumped on baggage carousels at a makeshift M*A*S*H unit inside the terminal.

Why does this self-styled "can do" president always lapse into such lame "who could have known?" excuses.

Who on earth could have known that Osama bin Laden wanted to attack us by flying planes into buildings? Any official who bothered to read the trellis of pre-9/11 intelligence briefs.

Who on earth could have known that an American invasion of Iraq would spawn a brutal insurgency, terrorist recruiting boom and possible civil war? Any official who bothered to read the C.I.A.'s prewar reports.

Who on earth could have known that New Orleans's sinking levees were at risk from a strong hurricane? Anybody who bothered to read the endless warnings over the years about the Big Easy's uneasy fishbowl.

In June 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, fretted to The Times-Picayune in New Orleans: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."

Not only was the money depleted by the Bush folly in Iraq; 30 percent of the National Guard and about half its equipment are in Iraq.

Ron Fournier of The Associated Press reported that the Army Corps of Engineers asked for $105 million for hurricane and flood programs in New Orleans last year. The White House carved it to about $40 million. But President Bush and Congress agreed to a $286.4 billion pork-filled highway bill with 6,000 pet projects, including a $231 million bridge for a small, uninhabited Alaskan island.

Just last year, Federal Emergency Management Agency officials practiced how they would respond to a fake hurricane that caused floods and stranded New Orleans residents. Imagine the feeble FEMA's response to Katrina if they had not prepared.

Michael Brown, the blithering idiot in charge of FEMA - a job he trained for by running something called the International Arabian Horse Association - admitted he didn't know until Thursday that there were 15,000 desperate, dehydrated, hungry, angry, dying victims of Katrina in the New Orleans Convention Center.

Was he sacked instantly? No, our tone-deaf president hailed him in Mobile, Ala., yesterday: "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job."

It would be one thing if President Bush and his inner circle - Dick Cheney was vacationing in Wyoming; Condi Rice was shoe shopping at Ferragamo's on Fifth Avenue and attended "Spamalot" before bloggers chased her back to Washington; and Andy Card was off in Maine - lacked empathy but could get the job done. But it is a chilling lack of empathy combined with a stunning lack of efficiency that could make this administration implode.

When the president and vice president rashly shook off our allies and our respect for international law to pursue a war built on lies, when they sanctioned torture, they shook the faith of the world in American ideals.

When they were deaf for so long to the horrific misery and cries for help of the victims in New Orleans - most of them poor and black, like those stuck at the back of the evacuation line yesterday while 700 guests and employees of the Hyatt Hotel were bused out first - they shook the faith of all Americans in American ideals. And made us ashamed.

Who are we if we can't take care of our own?

The Great British Sex Survey...with a bit of love and romance!

6 September 2005

Yahoo Personals have just published the results of their great British sex survey. Yahoo argue that a revolution is taking place in Britain; or maybe there is just a greater willingness to talk about sex; particularly for women to talk about sex. The survey was about sex, love and romance; although the latter two are a bit of an afterthought.

So here are the results. How would you have replied? What would be the result if the same questions were asked in Thailand or were asked in China. Almost no one has sex in Singapore or Hong Kong because they are too tired, stressed and over worked. At least that has been the reply to the annual Durex survey. Either that of Hong Kong and Singaporean men are all traveling to Bangkok for a less stressful encounter !

28% of all men and 26% of all women report that they have had sex with someone they have met on the internet.

The majority of respondents - 52% - are not turned on by the idea of sex with a stranger

Just over 1 in 3 respondents admit to having sex at their place of work with 40% of men saying they have done so compared with 31% of women saying so.

37% of women claim to have used leather, rubber, or latex articles as sexual turn ons compared with 30% of men

3 out of 4 women admit to having faked an orgasm during sex. 1 in 3 of all men say they have.

2 out of 3 respondants would enjoy 3-in-a-bed sex 80% of all men went for this, compared to 50% of all women

13% of people have paid to have sex, almost all of which were men.

Twice as many men as women would rather have bad sex than none at all!

After a night of sex I have woken up next to someone whose name I didn't know. 3 out of 4 respondents have never done so, Of those who had, almost 2 to 1 were men.

Nearly 50% of women would sleep with another woman if they knew that nobody would find out, while 14% of men would sleep with a man under the same circumstances.

The thought of participating in a sex orgy goes down well with just over 2 out of 3 respondents. 76% of men endorse the idea as do 57% of all women

94% of men think about sex every day, compared with 75% of women.

47% of men and 42% of women have been involved in more than one sexual affair at a time.

82% of men and 70% of women think they have a high sex drive.

Driving and sex. 72% of all men and 57% of all women would give or receive oral sex while driving.

94% of men use pornography, compared with 63% of women.

If I had the chance to watch people making love without being seen, I’d take it. 82% of all men and 65% of all women would do this.

23% of all men and women rated being too tired as their main reason for not getting enough sex.

When asked have I tied someone up or been tied up during sex. 58% of men and 62% of women answered yes.

Ignoring the obvious in New Orleans

2 September 2005

One of the biggest problems with the news coverage of Hurricane Katrina is that there are lots of white folks on TV talking about lots of black folks but making no mention of either race or colour.

Some facts; 67 per cent of New Orleans residents were black. 28% of New Orleans residents lived below the poverty line. An guess what, nearly all the visible people left behind in New Orleans are black and poor. These are people who could not leave the city and who maybe had not even understood the importance of evacuation. The poor simply did not get out in time; and more alarming were given little assistance to get out.

Would the US response have been this slow or this poorly planned if there was similar devastation in Florida, where folks are white and where the Governor is the President's brother. Votes don't matter so much in Louisiana where black people don't vote and where the Governor (Ms Blanco) is a Democrat.

It is all very well telling people to evacuate. Many people need the means and they need to know that there is some security over what they have left behind.

And for many of these people they could not imagine leaving what little they possess and that if they lost what they had they could not replace them. Guess what; they have no insurance, no family support, no comfortable job that would continue to pay them during this time.

So white reporters ignore the obvious in fear presumably of saying something that will upset the delicate racial sensitivities or upset the politically correct.

Someone should be answering the questions of why over 99% of the refugees that we see on TV in New Orleans are black. The alarming TV footage of looters is almost entirely of black people; why? We will never know the answers unless someone asks the questions.

No one has made sense of the looting. It is understandable that people will loot food from a shuttered shop when they are trapped by a flood and have no idea when help will come. But what is happening when during a disaster people help themselves in a leisurely fashion to dry goods, electricals and clothing at Wal-Mart. The reporters seem to deliberately avoid being judgmental.

America's journalists are doing their country a disservice. They portray a nation that says no matter where the disaster strikes, no matter what race, color, creed, or socioeconomic level they hail from, every one is in it together. This is quite clearly not true. Katrina did not hit everyone equally. White rich America is safe and comfortable and watching TV while black, poor America struggles to survive or is herded into football stadiums. Out of sight and out of mind.

At the core of this issue is the simple question: why are these African-Americans so poor to begin with?

Tacky, Tacky, Tacky

2 September 2005

The main reason that Mohammed al-Fayed has not been granted British citizenship is that he has an unmatched ability for tackiness. The latest offering at his Harrods store (which should immediately be boycotted by all) is a statue of the late Princess Diana and Dodi al-Fayed, who died together in a Paris car crash in 1997.

The work commissioned by al-Fayed shows the couple holding hands and gazing into each other's eyes beneath a soaring albatross (or is it a dodo bird).

Diana is wearing a dress with a plunging neckline, while Dodi's shirt is unbuttoned to reveal a bare chest. Dodi also appears to have lost a significant amount of weight.

The new work is called, "Innocent Victims," suggesting, as al-Fayed has repeatedly done that that his son and the princess were murdered, despite the fact that the driver was plastered and driving recklessly.

Visions of the end of the world?

1 September 2005

So this is what it looks like. The end of the world. Cities emptied as people try to flee to safety. Buildings flattened. Streets turned into flowing sewers littered with rotting carcases.

For all the US bravado about looking after the rest of the world it really does look as though they are struggling to look after their own.

When the Tsunami hit South Asia the US were first on the scene with aid, military and logistical support. They did not ask for praise or reward. They did it because the y could do it. And frankly their aid and support put Asia's so called superpowers, the Chinese and Japanese to shame.

But with the catastrophe that has hit New Orleans and surrounding cities the US looks ill prepared. New Orleans though it had escaped the worst of Hurricane Katrina. But experts had warned that the network of earthen, steel and concrete barriers that protected the city was inadequate. A day after the storm past, sections of two levees broke, spilling water into the streets and inundating an estimated 80 percent of the city, much of which lies below sea level.

Has too much money, effort and resource been diverted to Iraq. Where are the National Guard; they do not appear to be in Louisiana and Mississippi. One commentator wrote as follows: "The president told us that we needed to fight in Iraq to save lives here at home. Yet -- after moving billions of domestic dollars to the Persian Gulf -- there are bodies floating through the streets of Louisiana. What does George W. Bush have to say for himself now?"

New Orleans is to be completely evacuated, a city of 500,000 people emptied. Those who had taken refuge in the Superdome as a shelter of last resort are being moved to another stadium in Houston, Texas. Conditions in the Superdome had become horrendous. There was no air conditioning, the toilets were backed up, and the stench was so bad that medical workers wore masks as they walked around. It may be months before people are allowed home. The disruption to lives is almost unimaginable.

The devastation has brought out the worst rather than the best of America. The lack of respect for human property and human decency is alarming. The lack of a decent emergency plan is all too apparent.

Some looting is understandable; desperate people without food and water will do desperate things. Some of the looting is nothing more than wanton criminal acts.

In this strange news world we remain gripped by the devastation in America. The World has barely acknowledged the deaths yesterday of nearly 1,000 Iraqis in Baghdad trampled to death due to rumour and fear of a possible suicide bomber. There are already charity events announced to support the Katrina relief efforts. There is now massive federal aid being sent to the worst hit areas.

But who will look after the relatives and families of Baghdad's dead. Who can explain why so many die in simple uncontrolled panic.

It is hard to know what to make of all of this. The US government has appeared cumbersome; it seems less able to protect and comfort its own people than it did in SEA at the start of this year.

But America does have strong civic groups, charitable organisations, American corporations and individuals, who will look after their own.

Thailand and much of the world has benefited from American generosity in times of need and should find whatever means a nation can to show support with those Americans who now have to rebuild their lives.

This is not the end of the world; people rebuild lives and cities. But it is a frightening message of just how fragile our lives are and how quickly we can descend to survival behaviour.