Saying Sorry

I had a conversation with female friends the other day about apologising. It was very interesting. Although my grandsons will possibly be annoyed if they ever read this, we all thought that men find it more difficult to apologise than women. In fact women often apologise for things that they shouldn't, just to keep the peace. 

Research does indicate that women apologise more frequently than men. It is thought that this is due to different perceptions about what is offensive - Women have a lower threshold as to what constitutes offensive behaviour. Women are more likely to apologise for serious or emotional situations. Research suggests women may be more focused on maintaining harmony in relationships, while some men might feel that apologizing is a sign of weakness.

When my husband was alive I certainly felt the there was an imbalance between us in our view of what warranted an apology. Fortunately we still managed to have a good relationship, despite me feeling that getting an apology was like getting "blood out of a stone". 

Apologising in appropriate situations is important. We all need to take responsibility for mistakes or hurt caused. I just do not think that it is appropriate to apologise for something that the apologiser was not responsible for. So, for example, I don't think that countries can apologise for something wrong that happened historically. I also don't think an individual can apologise for someone else.

The current political spat between Starmer & Robbins is unedifying. It's a face off between supposed different perceptions of what happened. It reveals a pressurised culture & how difficult it must be to work at the top level of government when dealings are not transparent. It isn't good enough to have "plausible deniability" & lack of an honest & accurate record of what has happened. That enables individuals to evade responsibility. Good record keeping takes time, but it appears that there was a deliberate decision or instruction not to do that in this case. In todays tech world it is not difficult to record a meeting, unless instructed not to do so.

 

Frankly no one comes out of this well. It stinks! Starmers "apology" just isn't good enough.

Secrets & Lies

Although telling the truth seems to be a good aim to have, it isn't always possible. There can be valid reasons to either avoid the absolute truth, or even massage the truth. Information can do harm and good. People can be hurt by knowing the truth. We try to avoid doing that if we are sensitive to the feelings of others.

On the other hand I do think that knowingly lying is to be avoided at all costs if possible. Over my lifetime politics has changed immesurably. When I was younger there was a code of behaviour that was adhered to by most politicians. There was two way respect I think, us for them & vice versa. I'm sure there were secrets & lies that the public were not aware of. But the franchise transaction was that politicians acted in the best interest of the country & the people.

I struggle to believe that is true anymore. 

Politicians, for whatever reason, do not answer direct questions directly. They obfusticate & answer an entirely different question that was not posed. They are schooled to do that. It is deeply annoying & frustrating. They are actually the architects of their own public mistrust. Frankly they deserve what they get. Honesty would actually be very refreshing. 

Then there is "political plausible deniability" - a strategic tactic allowing leaders to evade responsibility for controversial, unethical, or illegal actions by ensuring no direct evidence links them to it. By utilizing ambiguous communication, surrogates, or fragmented chains of command, officials can credibly claim ignorance if the action is exposed, shielding themselves from accountability. The thing is that we know. They have been rumbled. We aren't idiots. This is the age of communication & investigative journalism. Sooner or later the truth usually emerges.

I have listened to the emerging information about the appointment of Mandelson as American ambassador for the UK. It is not black & white, there are shades of grey. But it does appear that Olly Robbins was "thrown under a bus" unfairly. People with more experience that me say clearly that "there was no abuse of process", not only was there no duty to disclose, but  the vetting system would collapse if they did. 

The issue for me is, given Mandelsons unsavoury history, I would have thought that a prime minister or the Foreign Office would have bent over backwards to ensure that this situation would not arise. Surely someone felt the need to ask detailed questions about possible outcomes of the appointment? 

This is a mess of the systems making. I can see that Enhanced Developed Vetting is deeply personal & private, but surely the buck stops with the Prime Minister & or the Foreign Secretary who ultimately make the appointment? There should have been questions asked without the necessity of private detail being revealed. 

I am amazed that this has been the way the UK runs vetting for years. Australias system is supposed to be very good. Maybe we should look at that. 

 

This week is going to be interesting if Olly Robbins appears before the Intelligence & Security Committee. 

Budgeting & Debt

I am in the fortunate position of knowing that my outgoings are covered by my income. It was not ever thus. I can remember, in my early marriage, we had no savings at all & all income was spent on the necessities of life, food, heating & rent for example. I can remember having egg & chips several times a week because it was cheap & filling. Everything was cooked from scratch & there were no "cook chill" meals. I wouldn't have been able to afford them even if there had been. We didn't go out for coffees & meals. Having a baby after just over a year of marriage put an extra strain on the household budget. I could no longer work.

As time went on both my husband & I had professional jobs & our income increased. We got on the housing ladder & left renting. We were able to save. Mortgages were manageable. Looking back my generation were lucky. But we did work hard for it & there were costs that were not financial. I felt I was like a hamster on a wheel juggling work, a home & family & elderly parents. 

We were quite frugal. We concentrated on the family, home & friends. We didn't have the many ways there are now to spend money. Life has changed substantially. There is more "stuff". Occasionally we bought big items on hire purchase, but basically we saved up for things we needed & wanted & paid cash. We didn't get into credit card debt because as far as I can remember we didn't have credit cards. The Barclaycard was introduced in 1966. The Access card came in in 1972. The 1980's & 90's started the widespread public adoption and reliance on credit cards. It also started the widespread reliance on credit card debt. 

As of early 2026, outstanding credit card debt in the UK has surpassed £70 billion, figures show a steady rise from previous years. Recent data indicates a 4.5% year-on-year increase in debt, while around 2.5 million UK adults are in persistent credit card debt. I find that truly shocking. Fiscal debt has become a way of life not only for individuals, but also for countries. Why should people manage their finances effectively if politicians think that fiscal debt is fine? The example is clear to see. Spending money you don't have is fine. Who needs to budget wisely if politicians don't?

A budget is a financial plan outlining projected income and expenses over a specific period, used to track spending, increase savings, and make informed financial decisions. I used to have a Boots diary which had an accounts section in the back that I filled in every week, so I knew where the money was going. It was a habit I learnt from my mother in law. I was obsessed with not overspending. There were very few luxuries. I made clothes for me & my daughter & even made a suit for my husband.  I cooked from scratch every day. We didn't pay people to work for us, we did our own maintenance on the house & the car. We managed to keep within our means & even save.

So we were able to move into better houses & profited from increasing values. 

It seems to me that today people want instant gratification. They have higher expectations of what the necessities of life really are. The concept of waiting until you have the money or lowering your expectations seems to have vanished. 

 

I'm really not sure that has made us happier.  

 

 

Strikes or Work to Rule?

I am struggling to find any reason to understand or support the UK resident doctors strike. Presumably everyone could argue that their pay had gone down in real terms since 2008 /9. To be clear, that's 18 years.

It's been a period of financial disasters. The Global Financial Crisis of 2007/8, the Great Recession of 2008/10, Brexit 2020, Covid 2020/21, the Cost of Living crisis 2022......Why should the doctors feel that they have a better case for pay increase than anyone else?

I appreciate the work all medics do. But there are a lot of people in caring professions I also appreciate, teachers, carers, nurses, social workers, all first responders....I would argue that all of these are vocations. All of them should seriously consider the impact of their strike action on other people, or they may well be held to be simply completely self interested. That is not what we expect from caring professions. I can see a justification for working to rule, because all of these professions only work effectively because of good will. But 15 strikes in 3 years. That is an appalling record & nothing to be proud of. 

It is important that any workers have the right to air grievances & negotiate pay & working conditions. I do think that unions & professional organisations have an important role to play in protecting their members. Individuals have very little power, but acting together empowers all. That right is important, but should not directly endanger the health or life of others. There should be effective alternatives such as negotiation, mediation & arbitration, entered into in good faith by both sides.

The mechanism should not be mechanised & turned into war. 

There has to be realism on both sides. It seems to me that not just the UK, but the whole of Europe is in a dire financial situation. There is widespread instability & disaffection with politics & politicians. Everyone's infrastructure is creaking under the load of population growth & change. Managing an economy must be a poisoned chalice in the face of international wars affecting everything. There will be very difficult choices as to where the money we have goes. It's mostly borrowed money anyway. We no longer have big gold reserves or a booming economy.

We will all have to face up to that. The resident doctors are ignoring the reality of the situation we are all in. It is blindly selfish & unaffordable to ask for a 26% pay rise. 

  

War & Geography

I am a big fan of Tim Marshall a British journalist & broadcaster. In particular his books "Prisoners of Geography"- 2015 & "The Power of Geography"- 2021. The former book's 6th chapter deals with the Middle East. The latter book's 2nd chapter is Iran. It's a shame that Trump & Netenyahu didn't read that before they embarked on their illegal war with Iran. Iran is mostly mountains & deserts. That makes a land war really difficult. But thuggish leaders don't tend to fight that kind of war now. They use drones & missiles.

The Gulf of Hormuz at it's narrowest is just 34 km across. The width of the actual shipping lane is just over 3 km. This means that Tehran can threaten to close it to everyone else, as Marshall pointed out in his book. "One fifth of global oil supplies pass through it, (so) closure would mean a world of pain".  We are in that world of pain because that is exactly what Tehran has done, very effectively & predictably. If Marshall knew that in 2021 why didn't Trump & Netenyahu & their acolytes?  

Surely they did, or someone advising them did. But they chose to ignore it. They chose to mount a war they couldn't actually win. They chose to invade a country without any legal reason to do so. They chose to kill & maim innocent civilians & destroy the infrastructure of a country. Why? Simply because they could. 

Men who have no moral compass. No conscience. No care for the pain & suffering they cause. Egotistic men who crave power & money. Men consumed by hubris, self confidence & deluded self belief in their own importance. Both men trying to evade justice & the legal system for crimes they are accused of committing. I don't know what the psychological definition of their personality types is, but it isn't anything good in a leader of a country.

Meanwhile the world looks on watching the devastation in so many places in our world today. Ukraine, Gaza & the West Bank, Iran.....Seemingly politics & politicians are helpless. The United Nations, what a misnomer, is unable to act because of veto's. But at least Guterres does speak out eloquently & compellingly. It all reminds me of the Jugoslav Wars between 1991 - 2001. History repeating itself as usual.

We humans seem to learn nothing. We just keep repeating the same mistakes & let tyrants win. Where is Democracy? Where is Justice? It isn't here now.  

 

Renewal, Religion & War

Easter is an important festival for Christians. It happens when spring is in full blossom & is a symbol of renewal for many, even if, like me, they are not believers. Hindus have the festival of Holi which celebrates the victory of good over evil among other things. Jews have Passover which commemorates liberation from slavery. The Persian new year, Nowruz, is the rebirth of nature. Buddhists have Songcran new year which symbolises purification.....

Yet at this wonderful time of year, when everything is literally springing into life, death & destruction is marching through huge areas of the world. In many cases not literally marching, because war today is death fought like a computer game, by missiles & drones. You don't have to look your victims in the eye & experience actually killing them. You do it from a bunker or from behind your own lines. You are removed from the reality of actually taking a life, seeing the blood, seeing the spirit depart, seeing the injury you have inflicted.

All of this at the behest of despotic & deranged leaders, who often claim some sort of religious belief, like Trump, Putin & Netenyahu. Weirdly they claim belief in Christianity, Orthodoxy & Judaism. Three religions with basically the same fundamental beliefs. All are monotheistic and Abrahamic. Anyone claiming to believe in god is also held to the same necessity to behave in a morally good way. The commandments of Christianity for example. Thou shall not kill & Thou shall not bear false witness spring to my mind. All 3 of these leaders routinely break those commandments. Shame on them.

If there is some spiritual being, some presence outside of our understanding, these men will surely face some sort of judgement & punishment. I sincerely hope they do, although I cannot imagine what punishment fits their dreadful crimes against humanity & our beautiful planet. 

Spring reminds us all that there is the possibility of renewal. It arrives every year & is an opportunity to reflect. I don't have much hope that the truly morally deficient leaders in our world will take the opportunity to reflect & be renewed in a better way. But I do hope that the people everywhere who oppose them & what they stand for will find the courage to oppose them & bring them to face justice. 

Having a Voice

Being a teacher means that I used my voice a lot & also was often exposed to childrens infections. Every time I got a cold it turned into something worse, laryngitis, strep throat, bronchitis, pneumonia & pleurisy. Even now I'm retired I don't seem to be able to just get a cold & I often lose my voice. As I live alone & don't talk to myself much - yet, it isn't a huge problem. 

But communicating & speaking is an important part of our lives. Our relationships & our work lives depend on it. Today we can communicate through other means, text & email for example. But they are open to misinterpretation in a way that speech isn't, because there are context clues with speech - tone of voice, facial expression & body language for example.

However that isn't really what I'm thinking of in this post. I'm thinking of the voice that we each have to influence other people & big decision making. I think that we forget that our individual opinion can be really important in the areas of politics & philosophy. If we speak out individually in social contexts we may or may not influence what others think. But if we disagree with a point of view I feel that it is important to be able to express it. Unfortunately it is often the case that we don't speak out for fear of offending or upsetting others. Or we just aren't confident or brave enough. But letting an unacceptable point of view pass is colluding with the speaker. It's actually cowardly.

People have fought for the rights of free speech. People have fought for the right to vote. People have fought for the right to be part of a collective like a union or professional organisation. One voice in the wilderness may not have much of an impact. But protests & marches can be powerful demonstrations of a groundswell of opinion that should not be underestimated. That is how change for the better happens. Think of Votes for Women, LGBT rights, Grenfell & safer Homes, the Right to Roam, Apartheid, Fracking....

Our right to protest, which is central to a healthy, functioning democracy, is under threat. The police have huge powers to restrict protests and arrest demonstrators under the Crime and Policing Bill.

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/eight-repeat-protests-that-achieved-change/

Having a voice & using it is very important. Use it or lose it. Losing your voice means far more than being dumbstruck. It means losing your power to affect change for the better.