A cocktail fit for a recession

You've all heard of a Kir Royal, the refreshing French summer cocktail made by mixing a shot of creme de cassis (blackcurrant liqueur) and some fine champagne.

Conscious of the austere times in which we are living, I have developed a recession-proof version of the old French classic. I call it the Kir Fitzroyal. As before, add a shot of creme de cassis to a glass, and instead of topping up with some costly champagne, simply load it up with some of the cheapest, nastiest Spanish cava (or Italian prosecco) you can find in order to complete the beverage.

Those of you in the know will recall that "Fitz" literally means "son of", from the French "fils", which I think works well as a label for our new recession-friendly tipple. I have heard it suggested that Fitz may also have been used to refer to a "royal bastard", but I suspect this may be apocryphal. If anyone knows otherwise, please let me know.

Now, all that remains is to grab your drink, sit back on your plastic garden furniture, take a deep breath and relax as you watch the global economy slowly spiral down the plug hole. Cheers!

One Man

A lot of commentators have pointed out the dangers of pinning all our hopes on Barack Obama. "He's just one man" they chime. "What can one man do?", "One man can't change the world", and so on...

Now perhaps I missed something over the last eight years, but George W. Bush is one man, and held the same office as Obama now occupies. Does anyone deny that George W. Bush has changed the world?

I'm not totally naive regarding Obama's capactity to change things, but if one man can make such massively regressive steps, push science back decades and create a global climate of fear and instability as George Bush, then just maybe one other man can do the exact opposite! Let's at least afford him the opportunity.

Lack of sustainability conference?

The 5th International conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability is a conference which holds no truck with irony or any of its close relations. Picking one of the least accessible countries on the planet, the organisers clearly felt holding the conference in Mauritius would send out a strong message on their attitude towards sustainability in general. And they were right. After all, what's a measly 15-hour flight and a carbon footprint an SUV-driving Sasquatch would be proud of when you can be smug for 3 days at an international sustainability conference?

Not really in the club

A nicely tongue-in-cheek piece of art has been unveiled outside the European Council building in Brussels. In the sculpture (which can be seen here on the BBC website), each EU country is represented from a stereotyped perspective. For example, the large lump that represents France simply has a banner draped over it with the word "Grève", meaning "strike". Germany is represented by a series of large motorways that looks alarmingly like a swastika.

However, the most insulting/apt/incisive representation (depending on your political leanings) is that of Britain, which is simply represented by its absence. I know the phrase is usually "a picture speaks a thousand words", but in this case the lack of a picture speaks even louder.

If Britain needed any further evidence of how it's participation in the EU (or lack thereof) is viewed by its neighbours it need look no further. Since Thatcher's reign, Britain's commitment-phobic approach to the EU angered, aggravated, delayed and annoyed many in the EU. Sooner or later Britain is going to have to make an actual decision on this - is she in or is she out?

Please, please, please can we join the Euro?

To Euro or not to Euro

One of the most annoying things about travelling to other countries in Europe is the need to change currency in advance or be face exorbitant handling fees when withdrawing money abroad. Now this may seem like a minor quibble, but this particular annoyance goes well beyond a personal pet peeve. Every time a friend or family member visits the UK from a eurozone country, they are annoyed. Every time exchange rates fluctuate so as to make British imports more expensive, people are annoyed.

Now I have always been pro-Euro, while the majority of people in Britain have always been anti-Euro. While times were good, it was virtually impossible to make convincing arguments for why Britain should join the euro; the pound is strong so we don't need anyone else. simple as that. However, with our global economy souring somewhat over the last year, the fragility of the pound has been laid bare. When markets began collapsing, investors and currency speculators dumped the pound en masse, seeing massive falls against the US dollar, Japanese yen and the euro. If Britain had been part of the eurozone, the sheer bulk of belonging to the world's largest currency (having surpassed the dollar in 2006/07) would have offered protection from such market turmoil, providing some much needed stability and perhaps also alleviating mild annoyances.

Now it seems the time has come again for this debate to rear its head. There have been recent murblings in the UK press, with Time Dowling of the Guardian suggesting Britain should join before it has to beg, as well as Jose Manuel Barosso (president of the European Commission) suggesting that Britain is closer than ever to making the leap into the Eurozone.

I sincerely hope Britain is readying itself to make this leap, as my mild annoyance could easily bubble over into something resembling nettled disgruntlement. And no one wants to see that!

If I ruled the world...

If I ruled the world, things would be different. Ok, let's not be completely unrealistic; if I ruled Britain, things would be different.

The papers are full of speculation regarding Alistair Darling's imminent pre-budget announcement, suggesting a broad range of direct and indirect tax cuts which will cost us in the region of £80 billion. The idea being that this economic injection will get us up an running again and in a few years when we're all better off Alistair can safely increase taxes without reprisal. There are a couple of problems with this approach, as you may have guessed.

Firstly, none of these proposals addresses the underlying issue of banks failing to make credit available to would-be borrowers, regardless of whether they are first-time buyers or small business owners. Peter Mandelson (as business secretary) claims he has had words with the banks and from next week we should be seeing a slight loosening of the banks' purse strings. We'll see.

The second issue is that these measures presume that giving people tax or VAT cuts will mean them spending the money that they have "saved" with these reduced taxes. In some countries, such as France, where short-term personal debt is at reasonable levels and most people pay off credit card balances by direct debit each month, this might seem perfectly logical. In the UK, where people are saddled with unbelievable sums of credit card debt, it would seem the more prudent option to clear these debts and not rush out on a manic, high-street spending spree. With credit-card debt at an estimated £60 billion (accounting for two thirds of total European credit-card debt), a massive handout from Darling and Brown might make a dent in associated repayments, without ever becoming the economic stimulus they are praying for.

I am all for cutting VAT and increasing personal tax credits for lower-pay workers, with or without impending recession. However, while fiddling about with these rates might provide a short, sharp jolt to the system, Brown and Darling should be using this opportunity to think big: VERY BIG. Now is the time to look at long-term infrastructure projects (think high-speed train lines from London to Glasgow), hoovering up unoccupied buy-to-let properties to meet affordable house building targets (think an end to endless housing waiting lists), providing massive incentives for sustainable enterprise and energy development (think Britain as a world leader in green economics) and finally putting this country on a path of social, environmental and fiscal responsibility.

Remember Alistair, a nation is not just for Christmas...I'll let you finish that one yourself.

Dodged a bullet

Ok, so we were always going to be leaning towards an Obama presidency...and of all the Republican congress people, John McCain is quite far down the chain of evility. It is worth noting however that during a presidential campaign successful candidates manage to hide 1) much of their true feelings and 2) the fact that there are greater complexities to almost every possible issue than they are presenting to you at any given moment. Hence the runaway success of mindless 3-syllable chants (as discussed on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart) such as John-Mc-Cain; U-S-A; Yes-We-Can and so on.

However, one element of John McCain's personality that really didn't get as much of an airing as it should have was his belief in all things superstitious. Here's an excerpt from the Association for Psychological Science's "Observer" magazine:

• Famously superstitious, John McCain avoids taking salt shakers handed to him, tossing his hat on a bed, or commenting on his prospects without touching wood. An aide always has his lucky pen at the ready. And, a confirmed triskaidekophobe, he always carries 31 cents in his pocket (that’s 13 backwards) — in lucky coins. Also, since his campaign headquarters happened to be on the 13th floor of an Arlington, VA office building, he renamed the floor. He’s a powerful guy. It’s the “M” floor now.*

Bloody hell; this guy's nuttier than a squirrel's hibernation savings. Let's just hope Obama isn't on the same page as McCain on this issue and that he is not the type of guy who refuses to take right turns when driving or step on cracks in the paving or has to have all the light switches in the White House pointed in the same direction. That's all we need!

* You can read the full article here.