Dog days
The economy isn't growing fast enough and creating enough jobs before November. You give Iraq freedom two days early to avoid any trouble at the ceremony. Your poll ratings are falling against a man more wooden than Bargain Hunt's David Dickinson (minus the orange glow).
So what do you do?
Try and win the punters over with your cute pooch.
Shameless.
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
The Harlem Globetrotters of international football
Brilliant idea. Can I suggest games be organised in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Congo and Sudan as soon as possible?
Perhaps if the Americans gave up their obscure isolationist sports (American football and baseball spring to mind) then perhaps we might have a better chance of sorting out international crises.
Brilliant idea. Can I suggest games be organised in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Congo and Sudan as soon as possible?
Perhaps if the Americans gave up their obscure isolationist sports (American football and baseball spring to mind) then perhaps we might have a better chance of sorting out international crises.
Cheeky move
So they pulled a fast one on me. After days spent arguing over who sould be the next President of the European Commission, the finally they plump for the Portuguese Prime Minister.
And I haven't even had a letter back from Javier Solana explaining to me what the procedures are to apply for the job. Still, I'm looking forward to his explanation.
My two or three readers will of course be the first to know if - and when - I receive a response.
So they pulled a fast one on me. After days spent arguing over who sould be the next President of the European Commission, the finally they plump for the Portuguese Prime Minister.
And I haven't even had a letter back from Javier Solana explaining to me what the procedures are to apply for the job. Still, I'm looking forward to his explanation.
My two or three readers will of course be the first to know if - and when - I receive a response.
Ways to fame and fortune - or not in my case
Occasionally I feel like throwing my radio against the wall while having breakfast. I listen to the Today programme. It's understandable.
Usually it's because of John Humphreys' ego or his incessant interruptions; more often than not it's because of Jim Naughtie's waffling and failure to ask the guest a question.
But today it was something different. I'm sorry, I just get frustrated when I hear about other people's success with their books. And it's not even those in JK Rowling's league which bother me; instead, it's those whose first books get published.
Take today for example. After several months of samizdat copies of an apparently seriously funny book being enthusiastically read by and appearing in a short article in the Metro (including by a producer who wants to film it), the book in question gets published. To great success. Apparently. Or at least it will now it's received coverage.
And meanwhile I tout mine around, with increasingly realisation it's ever going to make the grade.
Why can't I have luck like that?
Then again, perhaps mine's just crap.
Occasionally I feel like throwing my radio against the wall while having breakfast. I listen to the Today programme. It's understandable.
Usually it's because of John Humphreys' ego or his incessant interruptions; more often than not it's because of Jim Naughtie's waffling and failure to ask the guest a question.
But today it was something different. I'm sorry, I just get frustrated when I hear about other people's success with their books. And it's not even those in JK Rowling's league which bother me; instead, it's those whose first books get published.
Take today for example. After several months of samizdat copies of an apparently seriously funny book being enthusiastically read by and appearing in a short article in the Metro (including by a producer who wants to film it), the book in question gets published. To great success. Apparently. Or at least it will now it's received coverage.
And meanwhile I tout mine around, with increasingly realisation it's ever going to make the grade.
Why can't I have luck like that?
Then again, perhaps mine's just crap.
Looking behind the figures - what does it all mean?
I almost feel they're doing them for me. I'm becoming a bit of a poll junkie, which I hope isn't too boring. But reading between the lines they do make for interesting reading - for me at any rate!
Brazil's equivalent of the CBI, the CNI, has published its quarterly poll on Lula's government, put together by the polling company Ibope. The headline figures, as the Folha and JB show is a fall in Lula's popularity from 60% to 54% and a rise in distrust of his government from 36% to 43%.
The JB - never a friend of the president and his party - noted that the fall was most stark amongst those with those you might imagine to be his key constituency: those with the lowest income. Between March and June there was a fall of 13% in the approval/disapproval ratings by those earning up to one minimum salary and of 8% by those earning between 2 two and five minimum salaries (although interesting there was no change in the approval/disapproval ratings for those earning between one and two minimum salaries).
Lula appears to be suffering as a result of voters' lack of confidence in the government to tackle unemployment - which could well account for the concern amongst the lower-paid. And he's going to have difficulty turning that around: forecasts don't expect Brazil's economy to grow too much this year, which will have a knock-on effect of the limited number of jobs created.
Meanwhile the government is perceived as having had most success with its policies to tackle famine and poverty - although even the approval ratings for these have fallen by 20% to 34% between in the six months since December. And given that much of the problem resides in the northeast of the country, it's probably no surprise to see the government's approval/disapproval ratings have fallen by 21% between March and June.
And yet for all the doom and gloom, there appears to be one figure which seems to have been overlooked. While the focus will be on Lula's approval and disapproval ratings, those who classify the government as 'regular' has risen slightly, by 4% to 42% since June last year. And that stability appears to be reflected in the low attention given to the battering received by the government in the press; the most commonly recalled item of news has been the increase in the minimum salary in May.
I almost feel they're doing them for me. I'm becoming a bit of a poll junkie, which I hope isn't too boring. But reading between the lines they do make for interesting reading - for me at any rate!
Brazil's equivalent of the CBI, the CNI, has published its quarterly poll on Lula's government, put together by the polling company Ibope. The headline figures, as the Folha and JB show is a fall in Lula's popularity from 60% to 54% and a rise in distrust of his government from 36% to 43%.
The JB - never a friend of the president and his party - noted that the fall was most stark amongst those with those you might imagine to be his key constituency: those with the lowest income. Between March and June there was a fall of 13% in the approval/disapproval ratings by those earning up to one minimum salary and of 8% by those earning between 2 two and five minimum salaries (although interesting there was no change in the approval/disapproval ratings for those earning between one and two minimum salaries).
Lula appears to be suffering as a result of voters' lack of confidence in the government to tackle unemployment - which could well account for the concern amongst the lower-paid. And he's going to have difficulty turning that around: forecasts don't expect Brazil's economy to grow too much this year, which will have a knock-on effect of the limited number of jobs created.
Meanwhile the government is perceived as having had most success with its policies to tackle famine and poverty - although even the approval ratings for these have fallen by 20% to 34% between in the six months since December. And given that much of the problem resides in the northeast of the country, it's probably no surprise to see the government's approval/disapproval ratings have fallen by 21% between March and June.
And yet for all the doom and gloom, there appears to be one figure which seems to have been overlooked. While the focus will be on Lula's approval and disapproval ratings, those who classify the government as 'regular' has risen slightly, by 4% to 42% since June last year. And that stability appears to be reflected in the low attention given to the battering received by the government in the press; the most commonly recalled item of news has been the increase in the minimum salary in May.
Tuesday, June 29, 2004
More problems in Teresina
It's reported by the Folha de Sao Paulo that the PT governor of Piaui, Wellington Dias, has sent his reform package to the state assembly to be voted on. My one or two readers will recall in previous weeks that the state was facing difficulties, being unable to pay state workers and owing the federal government millions which it's trying to renegotiate.
Dias proposes cutting 10 ministries and reducing the political appointees in the state civil service by 20% - and according to his point man, Ricardo Pontes, this won't affect the wider civil service.
However, trouble already seems to be brewing. State deputies are already grumbling about the package, on both the government and opposition sides. One PFL member is alleging there doesn't seem to be any forethought or planning to the process.
And Wellington Dias doesn't look like he can count on the support of his brethen in the PT either. As I suggested the other week, the impact of Piaui's crisis could stretch beyond the state capital, Teresina. According to the Diario do Povo in Piaui, the federal government is not pleased at the goings-on. The newspaper notes that in the Fax Brasilia column of the weekly magazine Isto E reports irritation in the Planalto that the PT candidate for mayor is getting hammered in the polls. And they're annoyed with Wellington Dias too, for increasing the size of the state and its payroll - in other words, bringing the problem onto himself.
This looks like it's going to run and run.
It's reported by the Folha de Sao Paulo that the PT governor of Piaui, Wellington Dias, has sent his reform package to the state assembly to be voted on. My one or two readers will recall in previous weeks that the state was facing difficulties, being unable to pay state workers and owing the federal government millions which it's trying to renegotiate.
Dias proposes cutting 10 ministries and reducing the political appointees in the state civil service by 20% - and according to his point man, Ricardo Pontes, this won't affect the wider civil service.
However, trouble already seems to be brewing. State deputies are already grumbling about the package, on both the government and opposition sides. One PFL member is alleging there doesn't seem to be any forethought or planning to the process.
And Wellington Dias doesn't look like he can count on the support of his brethen in the PT either. As I suggested the other week, the impact of Piaui's crisis could stretch beyond the state capital, Teresina. According to the Diario do Povo in Piaui, the federal government is not pleased at the goings-on. The newspaper notes that in the Fax Brasilia column of the weekly magazine Isto E reports irritation in the Planalto that the PT candidate for mayor is getting hammered in the polls. And they're annoyed with Wellington Dias too, for increasing the size of the state and its payroll - in other words, bringing the problem onto himself.
This looks like it's going to run and run.
Raising questions
Interesting figures come out today in the two Brazilian papers I usually check, the Jornal do Brasil and the Folha de Sao Paulo. Both have prompted me to write to the polling firms involved to see if I can establish why there may be differences in the results.
In the JB the present mayor, the PFL's Cesar Maia, is reported to have fallen 11 points to 34% between May and June according to a poll done by Instituto Gerp. The second placed candidate, the PL's Marcelo Crivella, rose 3 points, to 14%. And in third place, former mayor, Luiz Paulo Conde of the PMDB has fallen two points to 6%.
Over in the Folha, both front-runners appear to be doing better: Cesar Maia is given 38% on Datafolha's most recent poll (which doesn't appear to be on its website), while Marcelo Crivella is on 20% and Conde on 9%. Even allowing for a margin of error of 3.1%, that's quite a difference.
Meanwhile in the Sao Paulo race Datafolha's most recent figures gave Jose Serra of the PSDB 30%, Paulo Maluf 24% and the PT's Marta Suplicy 20%, according to a poll taken last Friday and Saturday.
But Ibope's figures are slightly different. While they still give Serra 30% and Maluf isn't far out with 21%, Marta is presented at being on 16%. Again the claim is made that there is a margin of error of 3% - but how can Marta's figures not hold up compared to the other two?
Of the three studies, I've only found Ibope's. Maybe the clue lies in the timing of their poll, which took place a week earlier than Datafolha's. But could that account for the slump in Marta's support?
Ibope also states that the process of deciding who to interview falls in two stages: first, they established the proportion of the area to be surveyed (Sao Paulo) according to census data. They then made a sample of 1024, which reflected that data. The criteria they used included the following: gender, age range, educational level, type of employment and geographic location. They claim that their margin of error for this poll was lower than that of Datafolha's or Instituto Gerp's - at 2.8 points.
However, other than stating they did these interviews personally, they don't specify how it was done. Was it face-to-face? Or by telephone? And how many did they have to rule out, who refused to take part?
Of course, these are questions I'm sure others would like to know about the other polls too. While Ibope has at least given some details of its sampling, it would be helpful to know whether the sample has changed and whether it takes account of those likely to vote (an ongoing challenge facing pollsters in the UK).
Interesting figures come out today in the two Brazilian papers I usually check, the Jornal do Brasil and the Folha de Sao Paulo. Both have prompted me to write to the polling firms involved to see if I can establish why there may be differences in the results.
In the JB the present mayor, the PFL's Cesar Maia, is reported to have fallen 11 points to 34% between May and June according to a poll done by Instituto Gerp. The second placed candidate, the PL's Marcelo Crivella, rose 3 points, to 14%. And in third place, former mayor, Luiz Paulo Conde of the PMDB has fallen two points to 6%.
Over in the Folha, both front-runners appear to be doing better: Cesar Maia is given 38% on Datafolha's most recent poll (which doesn't appear to be on its website), while Marcelo Crivella is on 20% and Conde on 9%. Even allowing for a margin of error of 3.1%, that's quite a difference.
Meanwhile in the Sao Paulo race Datafolha's most recent figures gave Jose Serra of the PSDB 30%, Paulo Maluf 24% and the PT's Marta Suplicy 20%, according to a poll taken last Friday and Saturday.
But Ibope's figures are slightly different. While they still give Serra 30% and Maluf isn't far out with 21%, Marta is presented at being on 16%. Again the claim is made that there is a margin of error of 3% - but how can Marta's figures not hold up compared to the other two?
Of the three studies, I've only found Ibope's. Maybe the clue lies in the timing of their poll, which took place a week earlier than Datafolha's. But could that account for the slump in Marta's support?
Ibope also states that the process of deciding who to interview falls in two stages: first, they established the proportion of the area to be surveyed (Sao Paulo) according to census data. They then made a sample of 1024, which reflected that data. The criteria they used included the following: gender, age range, educational level, type of employment and geographic location. They claim that their margin of error for this poll was lower than that of Datafolha's or Instituto Gerp's - at 2.8 points.
However, other than stating they did these interviews personally, they don't specify how it was done. Was it face-to-face? Or by telephone? And how many did they have to rule out, who refused to take part?
Of course, these are questions I'm sure others would like to know about the other polls too. While Ibope has at least given some details of its sampling, it would be helpful to know whether the sample has changed and whether it takes account of those likely to vote (an ongoing challenge facing pollsters in the UK).
Monday, June 28, 2004
Possible new job?
So the Portuguese PM is to be the next president of the European Commission? Sounds a bit like smoked-filled rooms to me. And exactly where was the job advertised?
But maybe it was and I missed seeing the job ad in the Economist this week.
Not to worry. I've written to Javier Solana, the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, today to see how I can put myself forward. I hope to put the details up when I get a response.
So the Portuguese PM is to be the next president of the European Commission? Sounds a bit like smoked-filled rooms to me. And exactly where was the job advertised?
But maybe it was and I missed seeing the job ad in the Economist this week.
Not to worry. I've written to Javier Solana, the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, today to see how I can put myself forward. I hope to put the details up when I get a response.
Spam, spam and more spam
I use AOL and I've noticed the amount of spam which comes through to my email account has risen considerably in the last month. Last week came news that an ex-AOL employee had been flogging off details of the company's subscribers to spammers.
But have we yet had a statement sent by the company apologising for the incident?
I'm still waiting.
I use AOL and I've noticed the amount of spam which comes through to my email account has risen considerably in the last month. Last week came news that an ex-AOL employee had been flogging off details of the company's subscribers to spammers.
But have we yet had a statement sent by the company apologising for the incident?
I'm still waiting.
Lib Dem certainty
What with the two by-elections in Leicester and Birmingham next month, as well as a local council by-election in Tower Hamlets, now comes news of this Opik-Hughes fight. At least this is one where we can guarantee the winner will be a Lib Dem!
What with the two by-elections in Leicester and Birmingham next month, as well as a local council by-election in Tower Hamlets, now comes news of this Opik-Hughes fight. At least this is one where we can guarantee the winner will be a Lib Dem!
Going back
Hugely entertaining. That's the only way I can think of describing it. At first I didn't think it would be much fun. But there was always a nagging curiosity at the back of my mind: I hadn't seen these people for more than 10 years - 12 to be precise. What would they be like now.
So on Saturday I took a deep breath and returned to the scene of my less glorious times: my old school, Bedales, for the 10-year reunion. And I have to say it was more fun than I expected.
Once I'd got over the initial shock of meeting people I had quite forgotten - and others who I was once friends with, but barely recognised them - the thing that gave me most pleasure was to see the differences between the various class cliques melt away. If anyone felt shy or unsure, as many of us did all those years ago, they no longer showed it. These callow youths I knew from a decade ago, all seeking affirmation and wanting to be liked, had developed into people in their own right. And they couldn't give a damn what anyone else thought.
What was really interesting was to see how some people had followed a path I expected them to take - a few had gone into computers and other technological areas; others had made a complete volte-face from what they enjoyed doing at school. For example our star sports performers are all now employed in business, advertising, accountancy. Another, who had been so shy and quiet you could be forgiven for not noticing her at school, had blossomed and was now acting, including parts in television dramas.
But no-one seemed to have made it really big. I suppose we had that shock a few years ago when one of our number popped up in the various celebrity magazines, having built his fortune on an empire dedicated to running balls and other events. But he was a no-show, so there wasn't a chance to find out how it was all going since.
Refreshing to see some of the class bullies had clearly mellowed and where actually quite nice people. Others, who had been on the receiving end (I was lucky not to have borne it too heavily), had it out with them - and they were genuinely apologetic. Odd to see those girls who I had crushes for - and amusing to watch as some of them stumbled off into the surrounding bushes to make up for lost time! And then there were the class beauties, who had not aged as gracefully as we thought they might and the plane Janes, who had really blossomed in the intervening 10 years.
By 4am the party was still going strong and the beer had yet to run out. But I had seen all I had wanted to; and besides I'm no longer so good at pulling all-nighters.
So will I see any of them again? A few contacts were made and possibly I might meet up for a drink. But there is a gulf of difference between being 16 and 28; a catch-up might be nice with one or two of the friends I lost touch with. But chances are I won't see them again for another 15 years - when the 25-year reunion comes around.
Hugely entertaining. That's the only way I can think of describing it. At first I didn't think it would be much fun. But there was always a nagging curiosity at the back of my mind: I hadn't seen these people for more than 10 years - 12 to be precise. What would they be like now.
So on Saturday I took a deep breath and returned to the scene of my less glorious times: my old school, Bedales, for the 10-year reunion. And I have to say it was more fun than I expected.
Once I'd got over the initial shock of meeting people I had quite forgotten - and others who I was once friends with, but barely recognised them - the thing that gave me most pleasure was to see the differences between the various class cliques melt away. If anyone felt shy or unsure, as many of us did all those years ago, they no longer showed it. These callow youths I knew from a decade ago, all seeking affirmation and wanting to be liked, had developed into people in their own right. And they couldn't give a damn what anyone else thought.
What was really interesting was to see how some people had followed a path I expected them to take - a few had gone into computers and other technological areas; others had made a complete volte-face from what they enjoyed doing at school. For example our star sports performers are all now employed in business, advertising, accountancy. Another, who had been so shy and quiet you could be forgiven for not noticing her at school, had blossomed and was now acting, including parts in television dramas.
But no-one seemed to have made it really big. I suppose we had that shock a few years ago when one of our number popped up in the various celebrity magazines, having built his fortune on an empire dedicated to running balls and other events. But he was a no-show, so there wasn't a chance to find out how it was all going since.
Refreshing to see some of the class bullies had clearly mellowed and where actually quite nice people. Others, who had been on the receiving end (I was lucky not to have borne it too heavily), had it out with them - and they were genuinely apologetic. Odd to see those girls who I had crushes for - and amusing to watch as some of them stumbled off into the surrounding bushes to make up for lost time! And then there were the class beauties, who had not aged as gracefully as we thought they might and the plane Janes, who had really blossomed in the intervening 10 years.
By 4am the party was still going strong and the beer had yet to run out. But I had seen all I had wanted to; and besides I'm no longer so good at pulling all-nighters.
So will I see any of them again? A few contacts were made and possibly I might meet up for a drink. But there is a gulf of difference between being 16 and 28; a catch-up might be nice with one or two of the friends I lost touch with. But chances are I won't see them again for another 15 years - when the 25-year reunion comes around.
Serra's lead rises; Marta risks missing run-off
The latest Datafolha poll shows Jose Serra and Paulo Maluf rising in Sao Paulo - and current mayor Marta Suplicy appearing to stall.
With 30% support (give or take 3%), Serra's main challenger appears to be Maluf, with 24%. If Suplicy doesn't do something soon, she could find herself out of the second round run-off in late October.
As I've said here before, Marta's difficulty is that as the incumbent she has a record to run on. But the fact must also be that her Workers Party (PT) has been reaping plenty of bad press recently, mainly from further up, in the federal government. From allegations about President Lula's drinking habits to claims of illicitly gained campaign funds and the Senate's decision last week to defeat the government over the minimum wage, Marta may well be the victim of actions beyond her control.
The latest Datafolha poll shows Jose Serra and Paulo Maluf rising in Sao Paulo - and current mayor Marta Suplicy appearing to stall.
With 30% support (give or take 3%), Serra's main challenger appears to be Maluf, with 24%. If Suplicy doesn't do something soon, she could find herself out of the second round run-off in late October.
As I've said here before, Marta's difficulty is that as the incumbent she has a record to run on. But the fact must also be that her Workers Party (PT) has been reaping plenty of bad press recently, mainly from further up, in the federal government. From allegations about President Lula's drinking habits to claims of illicitly gained campaign funds and the Senate's decision last week to defeat the government over the minimum wage, Marta may well be the victim of actions beyond her control.
Friday, June 25, 2004
Buying victory
Actually maybe there's something in this euro idea. Think about it: of the 11 tournaments there have been, 8 of the winners are now members of the euro.
Perhaps that's the angle the Yes campaign should use in the euro referendum should it ever come about: "Vote yes for the euro... and Euro glory!"
Actually maybe there's something in this euro idea. Think about it: of the 11 tournaments there have been, 8 of the winners are now members of the euro.
Perhaps that's the angle the Yes campaign should use in the euro referendum should it ever come about: "Vote yes for the euro... and Euro glory!"
Why we lost?
Before last night's game, I got the following invite:
"[S]ince a lot of you live in or around god's county of Islington, I thought I'd see if any of you fancy joining us for football later. Some friends and I are planning is to watch it at The Islington Bar and Dining House. An unusual venue you might think? But the owners have barred Nathan Barley, banned the Japanese folktronica nerds and binned their entire stock of sun-dried tomato ale in favour of a huge screen and cold lager. Best of all, it was pretty empty for the last match, as no self respecting Ingurland fan (or Portuguese for one-night-only-Scot) wants to be watching the match surrounded by square glasses wearing chin strokers. So, a win-win; cool bar, nice screen, empty."
well, it was close to Bethnal Green, I thought. Why not?
So where do I end up? Back in the Portuguese-run Costa do Estoril cafe on Lavender Hill. And to rub salt in the wounds, we found ourselves next to two Scots who were baying for English blood all the way through.
Even if we had to put up with celebrations by the wrong side, it was quite enlightening watching the media war. The Costa do Estoril shows the game on the RTP network by satellite, direct from Lisbon. And after the game commentators took to the street to report on the cheering fans.
The English were particularly instructive. Standing outside a bar, all lagered-up and bare-chested, exposing red torsos and beer bellies, an RTP correspondent tried to interview a fan. Except his word were drowned out by belligerent shouting by other fans around him. Then a particularly inebriated individual not only tried to cover the camera lens but approached the microphone and started shouting obscenities to the Portuguese nation at large.
Nice.
I wonder what new vocabulary young Portuguese fans learned last night which they might find themselves using in this morning's English classes.
RTP quickly cut away from the aggressive tone of England fans 'on holiday' to the sight of joyful Portuguese dancing in the streets. One woman had a T-shirt on, with English written on it:
"If you don't want the euro (under which the currency's symbol), then you can't have the euro (under which the logo of Euro 2004)".
Which, I think, makes the point quite succintly.
The next question though: where can I get one like it? Do I have any Portuguese readers? If so, let me know and I'll send you a classy blue Cambridgeshire in Europe T-shirt with the stars around it!
Before last night's game, I got the following invite:
"[S]ince a lot of you live in or around god's county of Islington, I thought I'd see if any of you fancy joining us for football later. Some friends and I are planning is to watch it at The Islington Bar and Dining House. An unusual venue you might think? But the owners have barred Nathan Barley, banned the Japanese folktronica nerds and binned their entire stock of sun-dried tomato ale in favour of a huge screen and cold lager. Best of all, it was pretty empty for the last match, as no self respecting Ingurland fan (or Portuguese for one-night-only-Scot) wants to be watching the match surrounded by square glasses wearing chin strokers. So, a win-win; cool bar, nice screen, empty."
well, it was close to Bethnal Green, I thought. Why not?
So where do I end up? Back in the Portuguese-run Costa do Estoril cafe on Lavender Hill. And to rub salt in the wounds, we found ourselves next to two Scots who were baying for English blood all the way through.
Even if we had to put up with celebrations by the wrong side, it was quite enlightening watching the media war. The Costa do Estoril shows the game on the RTP network by satellite, direct from Lisbon. And after the game commentators took to the street to report on the cheering fans.
The English were particularly instructive. Standing outside a bar, all lagered-up and bare-chested, exposing red torsos and beer bellies, an RTP correspondent tried to interview a fan. Except his word were drowned out by belligerent shouting by other fans around him. Then a particularly inebriated individual not only tried to cover the camera lens but approached the microphone and started shouting obscenities to the Portuguese nation at large.
Nice.
I wonder what new vocabulary young Portuguese fans learned last night which they might find themselves using in this morning's English classes.
RTP quickly cut away from the aggressive tone of England fans 'on holiday' to the sight of joyful Portuguese dancing in the streets. One woman had a T-shirt on, with English written on it:
"If you don't want the euro (under which the currency's symbol), then you can't have the euro (under which the logo of Euro 2004)".
Which, I think, makes the point quite succintly.
The next question though: where can I get one like it? Do I have any Portuguese readers? If so, let me know and I'll send you a classy blue Cambridgeshire in Europe T-shirt with the stars around it!
An alternative match report
Of all the people I should be sitting next to during last night's Portugal-England game, it should be two beered-up Scots urging the Portuguese forward at every turn and howling at every loss of possession.
But they needn't have worried. As happened against France, England began to crumble in the last quarter, giving away the ball needlessly and finding that defending is a lot harder than going forward. And what a surprise, 10 minutes from the end up pops a Portuguese player and goal.
Still, at least it wasn't in injury time...
This has always been England's problem, fading away towards the end. The signs were there on Monday, against Croatia too, when they scored to pull it back from 3-1 to 3-2. Luckily Lampard scored a few minutes later to give England the cushion they needed.
But what ca I say about last night? Even if they were struggling, England could - and should have held out. But instead they got pulled into extra-time and then went behind in the second period. Again, Lampard to the rescue. And yes, we may bemoan the fact that the disallowed goal should have counted, but I hope that won't be used as an excuse to mask some of the failings in this team.
I'm sure Beckham thought that as captain he had to lead by example and take the first (missed) penalty. But he hasn't been playing well all tournament and wasn't in the right frame of mind to do so. And everyone was struggling with that penalty spot, so again, no excuses.
Compare the England penalties to Portugal's. While the Portuguese slotted them away in the corner, three of England's went straight down the middle. Did that reflect the level of English confidence?
Ultimately, England didn't deserve to win. But the media, the fans and the team will no doubt seize on the disallowed goal and Rooney's substitution as evidence that 'we wuz robbed'.
No we weren't. And perhaps now (but extremely unlikely), we will stop going around claiming to be the best team at this tournament and go back to basics. They could start by finding a new goalkeeper. James still looks shaky, especially when England are on the defensive.
If we were the best team at Euro 2004, second only to France, then England - not Portugal - would be in the semi-finals. It's that simple.
Of all the people I should be sitting next to during last night's Portugal-England game, it should be two beered-up Scots urging the Portuguese forward at every turn and howling at every loss of possession.
But they needn't have worried. As happened against France, England began to crumble in the last quarter, giving away the ball needlessly and finding that defending is a lot harder than going forward. And what a surprise, 10 minutes from the end up pops a Portuguese player and goal.
Still, at least it wasn't in injury time...
This has always been England's problem, fading away towards the end. The signs were there on Monday, against Croatia too, when they scored to pull it back from 3-1 to 3-2. Luckily Lampard scored a few minutes later to give England the cushion they needed.
But what ca I say about last night? Even if they were struggling, England could - and should have held out. But instead they got pulled into extra-time and then went behind in the second period. Again, Lampard to the rescue. And yes, we may bemoan the fact that the disallowed goal should have counted, but I hope that won't be used as an excuse to mask some of the failings in this team.
I'm sure Beckham thought that as captain he had to lead by example and take the first (missed) penalty. But he hasn't been playing well all tournament and wasn't in the right frame of mind to do so. And everyone was struggling with that penalty spot, so again, no excuses.
Compare the England penalties to Portugal's. While the Portuguese slotted them away in the corner, three of England's went straight down the middle. Did that reflect the level of English confidence?
Ultimately, England didn't deserve to win. But the media, the fans and the team will no doubt seize on the disallowed goal and Rooney's substitution as evidence that 'we wuz robbed'.
No we weren't. And perhaps now (but extremely unlikely), we will stop going around claiming to be the best team at this tournament and go back to basics. They could start by finding a new goalkeeper. James still looks shaky, especially when England are on the defensive.
If we were the best team at Euro 2004, second only to France, then England - not Portugal - would be in the semi-finals. It's that simple.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
Lunch in a greenhouse
It's not often I manage to make my work colleagues envious. But this afternoon I went to meet a friend for lunch in the Swiss Re building around the corner. But most will probably know it better as the Gherkin.
There's a restaurant on its 34th floor (a high speed affair which makes your eyes pop). The restaurant itself is quite small, although a small swirling staircase takes you to the bar at the top, where a handful of tables fill the space. From here the top of the building takes on a glasshouse affair, with only sky above and the clouds floating along.
A rather impressive sight, especially as the building is taller than any other nearby, other than the Nat West building to the west. And from this height it's possible to look down Whitechapel Road, see the Tower of London, look to the west and notes London's landmarks. While it's tall, it's not so high that you can't make out activity going on the streets below - people can be easily made out and identified.
I wasn't sure whether we could see to the edge of London from the top floor (probably not), although it seemed like it; I could make out patches of green across the river to the south and to the north east.
Of course, the only way to get a ring side view of London this high up is to be a guest of someone who works in the building. It's not open to the wider public. Hence the green-eyed monster's visit to my colleagues this morning.
And as for the lobby in the Gherkin. Well, you can take it away quite frankly. High ceiling and cold metallic walls - all rather quasi-fascistic with no greenery to break the bleakness.
It's not often I manage to make my work colleagues envious. But this afternoon I went to meet a friend for lunch in the Swiss Re building around the corner. But most will probably know it better as the Gherkin.
There's a restaurant on its 34th floor (a high speed affair which makes your eyes pop). The restaurant itself is quite small, although a small swirling staircase takes you to the bar at the top, where a handful of tables fill the space. From here the top of the building takes on a glasshouse affair, with only sky above and the clouds floating along.
A rather impressive sight, especially as the building is taller than any other nearby, other than the Nat West building to the west. And from this height it's possible to look down Whitechapel Road, see the Tower of London, look to the west and notes London's landmarks. While it's tall, it's not so high that you can't make out activity going on the streets below - people can be easily made out and identified.
I wasn't sure whether we could see to the edge of London from the top floor (probably not), although it seemed like it; I could make out patches of green across the river to the south and to the north east.
Of course, the only way to get a ring side view of London this high up is to be a guest of someone who works in the building. It's not open to the wider public. Hence the green-eyed monster's visit to my colleagues this morning.
And as for the lobby in the Gherkin. Well, you can take it away quite frankly. High ceiling and cold metallic walls - all rather quasi-fascistic with no greenery to break the bleakness.
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
FHC in 2006?
Also in the Jornal do Brasil today is a report on the monthly Citizen Satisfaction Index, published by the National Transport Confederation (CNT). The headline is that Lula's polls have slumped since May, with 54% in support and 37.6% against. Compare it to July last year when his approval ratings were 77.6% and disapproval at 14.4%.
Clearly the bad press over campaign funding scandals, allegation of alcoholism and his economic plan have all contributed (indeed, the London-based PT is ablaze with debate and discussion on Lula's economic plan, not least with a recent Uberlandia Letter signed by various economists questioning the government's direction).
Lula's figures for the last month contrast with those for governors and mayors in general, whose polls haven't deviated much. But then as the only politician in his position, he is clearly going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to personal identification.
Of some interest in the findings are the pollsters' attempts to identify who might be best placed for 2006. Two lists are presented, each with different candidates for the former governing coalition of the PSDB and PFL. In both lists Lula would top the list, with 28-29% of support (the advantage of incumbency?), but it's interesting to see who would be after him. In one list, if Geraldo Alckmin, the current Sao Paulo governor, were the PSDB's candidate, then he would trail behind Ciro Gomes and Garotinho with 10.5% of the poll.
But if the PSDB were to go for the former president, Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), then the PSDB would rise to second place, with 16.6%. Of course it's still a good 10-12% down on Lula, but evidently voters have a charitable impression of their last president.
Could FHC mount a re-run in 2006? I'm sure the PSDB will be looking at those polling figures with interest.
Also in the Jornal do Brasil today is a report on the monthly Citizen Satisfaction Index, published by the National Transport Confederation (CNT). The headline is that Lula's polls have slumped since May, with 54% in support and 37.6% against. Compare it to July last year when his approval ratings were 77.6% and disapproval at 14.4%.
Clearly the bad press over campaign funding scandals, allegation of alcoholism and his economic plan have all contributed (indeed, the London-based PT is ablaze with debate and discussion on Lula's economic plan, not least with a recent Uberlandia Letter signed by various economists questioning the government's direction).
Lula's figures for the last month contrast with those for governors and mayors in general, whose polls haven't deviated much. But then as the only politician in his position, he is clearly going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to personal identification.
Of some interest in the findings are the pollsters' attempts to identify who might be best placed for 2006. Two lists are presented, each with different candidates for the former governing coalition of the PSDB and PFL. In both lists Lula would top the list, with 28-29% of support (the advantage of incumbency?), but it's interesting to see who would be after him. In one list, if Geraldo Alckmin, the current Sao Paulo governor, were the PSDB's candidate, then he would trail behind Ciro Gomes and Garotinho with 10.5% of the poll.
But if the PSDB were to go for the former president, Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), then the PSDB would rise to second place, with 16.6%. Of course it's still a good 10-12% down on Lula, but evidently voters have a charitable impression of their last president.
Could FHC mount a re-run in 2006? I'm sure the PSDB will be looking at those polling figures with interest.
Speculation starts
His body not yet even cold, already speculation has begun over what Briola's death means for the future of his Democratic Workers Party (PDT). This Folha de Sao Paulo story suggests that without him leading the charge the party may well realign itself with Lula's governing coalition in Congress. Brizola had pulled out his support from Lula back in December when one of the PDT ministers left the government.
However, several hundred PDT supporters barracked Lula when he went to pay his respects at Brizola's coffin in Rio yesterday. Whichever direction the PDT takes, it's going to leave some people unhappy.
The Jornal do Brasil has an article this morning, 'Sem Brizola, PDT perde o rumo politico' (Without Brizola, the PDT loses its political direction) in which the different routes now facing the party are presented. A political scientist, Geraldo Tadeu Monteiro, claims that the PDT can't survive without Brizola and could find itself incorporated under another banner, perhaps that of the Brazilian Socialist Party (PSB).
But the Sergipe senator, Almeida Lima, argues that 'His death could help strengthen the workers' movement.' He doesn't think now is the time for the PDT to start debating its future and argues that the party could invite a politician to be its presidential candidate in 2006 (which Brizola was intimating he wanted to do months before his death). Lima cites Garotinho, Ciro Gomes and Tasso Jereissati as those who could possibly be the party'scandidatee.
In my opinion - and for what it's worth - this shows up the weakness of the PDT without Brizola and the degree of fluidity within Brazilianpoliticss. It is common for politicians to join one party, get elected on that ticket and then swap for another party. Garotinho is just one example of this, having been elected Rio's governor in 1998 for the PDT, falling out with Brizola, joining the PSB and then moving to the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party or PMDB (a catch-all party with no distinct ideology one way or the other).
And is it possible that Garotinho is already positioning himself for a possible return for 2006? In the Jornal do Brasil article he claims that Brizola's death 'won't destroy the PDT as some think. When I left the PSB my heart wanted to go to the PDT.'
If senior pedetistas (members of the PDT) are of the opinion that a politician can be brought in to lead the party, then the PDT will suffer. If a politician is bigger than his party then the prospect of stronger party identification by both politicians and the electorate will continue to be a distant dream. And putting the PDT up for the highest bidder risks taking the party in a different direction - and confusing the voters in the long run.
His body not yet even cold, already speculation has begun over what Briola's death means for the future of his Democratic Workers Party (PDT). This Folha de Sao Paulo story suggests that without him leading the charge the party may well realign itself with Lula's governing coalition in Congress. Brizola had pulled out his support from Lula back in December when one of the PDT ministers left the government.
However, several hundred PDT supporters barracked Lula when he went to pay his respects at Brizola's coffin in Rio yesterday. Whichever direction the PDT takes, it's going to leave some people unhappy.
The Jornal do Brasil has an article this morning, 'Sem Brizola, PDT perde o rumo politico' (Without Brizola, the PDT loses its political direction) in which the different routes now facing the party are presented. A political scientist, Geraldo Tadeu Monteiro, claims that the PDT can't survive without Brizola and could find itself incorporated under another banner, perhaps that of the Brazilian Socialist Party (PSB).
But the Sergipe senator, Almeida Lima, argues that 'His death could help strengthen the workers' movement.' He doesn't think now is the time for the PDT to start debating its future and argues that the party could invite a politician to be its presidential candidate in 2006 (which Brizola was intimating he wanted to do months before his death). Lima cites Garotinho, Ciro Gomes and Tasso Jereissati as those who could possibly be the party'scandidatee.
In my opinion - and for what it's worth - this shows up the weakness of the PDT without Brizola and the degree of fluidity within Brazilianpoliticss. It is common for politicians to join one party, get elected on that ticket and then swap for another party. Garotinho is just one example of this, having been elected Rio's governor in 1998 for the PDT, falling out with Brizola, joining the PSB and then moving to the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party or PMDB (a catch-all party with no distinct ideology one way or the other).
And is it possible that Garotinho is already positioning himself for a possible return for 2006? In the Jornal do Brasil article he claims that Brizola's death 'won't destroy the PDT as some think. When I left the PSB my heart wanted to go to the PDT.'
If senior pedetistas (members of the PDT) are of the opinion that a politician can be brought in to lead the party, then the PDT will suffer. If a politician is bigger than his party then the prospect of stronger party identification by both politicians and the electorate will continue to be a distant dream. And putting the PDT up for the highest bidder risks taking the party in a different direction - and confusing the voters in the long run.
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
I'm staggered. I really am. As if it wasn't enough for the Bush administration to have one poet in the guide of Donald Rumsfeld, here's another, previously overlooked individual.
Step forward, press officer Scott McClellan. Truly, this man deserves his own anthology too. Observe the subtle interplay between a White House correspondent and McClellan over the difference between what are facts and what are not.
Admittedly, it isn't all his own work. I must concede the nameless journalist does bring him forward towards sheer brilliance:
"MR. McCLELLAN: David, you're just ignoring the facts. You're not looking at what Director Tenet said. You're not looking at what Secretary Powell said before the United Nations.
Q Scott, do you really think people buy this?
MR. McCLELLAN: And I think that you can seek to drive a wedge, but there is no wedge there between what the September 11th Commission said and what the facts --
Q Between what the facts are and what the reality is.
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and what the facts are. You're talking about impressions; I'm talking about facts."
And the following:
"MR. McCLELLAN: What do you want to dispute that Secretary Powell said and Director Tenet said? I mean, let's talk about the facts, because those were the facts that we outlined before making the decision to go in and remove that regime from power. And so let's talk about those facts.
Q Have they been borne out by these --
MR. McCLELLAN: It's nice to talk about these impressions and the way people are trying to spin certain things, but let's talk about the facts.
Q I'm looking for facts.
MR. McCLELLAN: Let's not ignore those facts. Well, the facts were before the United Nations, through Secretary Powell's statement, and they were before Congress, through Director Tenet's testimony.
Q What have we learned since then, from all this intelligence?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, obviously you learn more post the decision to go into Iraq, and you learn more as you get information from those detainees. And I'm sure that Director Tenet can talk to you about those issues and give you a read on that. That's a very general question you're asking me right here, right now.
Q Is there anything else that goes to the notion of an al Qaeda-Iraq alliance?
MR. McCLELLAN: But if you go back and look at what we outlined, and the facts, we stand by that."
Alternately, I suppose another way of tackling this heady material is to perform it the theatre in the same way as Nicholas Kent put on the Hutton inquiry.
Step forward, press officer Scott McClellan. Truly, this man deserves his own anthology too. Observe the subtle interplay between a White House correspondent and McClellan over the difference between what are facts and what are not.
Admittedly, it isn't all his own work. I must concede the nameless journalist does bring him forward towards sheer brilliance:
"MR. McCLELLAN: David, you're just ignoring the facts. You're not looking at what Director Tenet said. You're not looking at what Secretary Powell said before the United Nations.
Q Scott, do you really think people buy this?
MR. McCLELLAN: And I think that you can seek to drive a wedge, but there is no wedge there between what the September 11th Commission said and what the facts --
Q Between what the facts are and what the reality is.
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and what the facts are. You're talking about impressions; I'm talking about facts."
And the following:
"MR. McCLELLAN: What do you want to dispute that Secretary Powell said and Director Tenet said? I mean, let's talk about the facts, because those were the facts that we outlined before making the decision to go in and remove that regime from power. And so let's talk about those facts.
Q Have they been borne out by these --
MR. McCLELLAN: It's nice to talk about these impressions and the way people are trying to spin certain things, but let's talk about the facts.
Q I'm looking for facts.
MR. McCLELLAN: Let's not ignore those facts. Well, the facts were before the United Nations, through Secretary Powell's statement, and they were before Congress, through Director Tenet's testimony.
Q What have we learned since then, from all this intelligence?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, obviously you learn more post the decision to go into Iraq, and you learn more as you get information from those detainees. And I'm sure that Director Tenet can talk to you about those issues and give you a read on that. That's a very general question you're asking me right here, right now.
Q Is there anything else that goes to the notion of an al Qaeda-Iraq alliance?
MR. McCLELLAN: But if you go back and look at what we outlined, and the facts, we stand by that."
Alternately, I suppose another way of tackling this heady material is to perform it the theatre in the same way as Nicholas Kent put on the Hutton inquiry.
Good result, but still a way to go
One thing you can always be sure of: the longer England wait for international footballing success, the more exaggerated the praise and adulation becomes.
Am I the only one to think statements like this aren't particularly helpful? I almost want to show at the team and its manager to shut up and get on with the job in hand - and win the bloody thing.
Then - and only then - will I start to listen to comments like these.
One drawback though: with England to play Portugal in the quarters, there's clearly no way I'm going to be able to pop down to the Costa do Estoril for this one...
One thing you can always be sure of: the longer England wait for international footballing success, the more exaggerated the praise and adulation becomes.
Am I the only one to think statements like this aren't particularly helpful? I almost want to show at the team and its manager to shut up and get on with the job in hand - and win the bloody thing.
Then - and only then - will I start to listen to comments like these.
One drawback though: with England to play Portugal in the quarters, there's clearly no way I'm going to be able to pop down to the Costa do Estoril for this one...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)