If Greece goes bust....

Boris Johnson's vote-attracting column in today's Telegraph might get a few knowing nods from the anti-coalition chapter but is this just his love of Rome clouding his vision?

Having read his book comparing the Roman Empire to the EU, I am a bit lost as to where he puts the Greeks in the same scenario being as most modern civilisation, law and sophisticated language in Europe originates from the Greeks. It now seems he has nailed his colours to the mast. Let the devils sink.

The Euro is defunct, the EU fiscal policy is to be shredded and let any country that cannot hold its own whither and die. Heath was a traitor for taking us into the EC, Brown a genius for keeping us out of the Euro. Oh Boris, where do you stand? It's dog eat dog out there, survival of the fittest and one less mouth to feed at the table means more for the rest of us, perhaps?
There is a slight problem with this noble argument. Firstly, should we let Greece fail then they take all that nice money we lent with them down the creek without a paddle. Secondly, where does a bankrupt country go? Do we all pick over the assets and choose which relic we want, how many olives can we carry away, which Greek island becomes ours and do we eat all the moussaka we can? Thirdly, where does it leave the global financial system?

To think that Greece can fall into oblivion peacefully all by itself is naive in the extreme. You play the game of high risk finance in a globalised money market and you pay the price. Now we are into the realm of picking and choosing who we want to cull. We saved our banks who participated in this craziness, now we think we can play God in the world in which we allowed them to participate. Think again.

You see, we could not afford to see Dubai go down - far too many Brits have interests over there. We couldn't let Ireland go down, they represent a large trading partner. We wouldn't let Portugal or Spain go down as we have properties, holidays and wine interests to protect. Italy is far too nice a place as we like their fast cars, low sense of morals, football and fashion. Greece? What have they ever done for us bar a few nice holiday resorts and feta cheese?

So it's a nice vote winner to pick on Greece. Easy target, no one cares if it disappeared off the map.

Or would they? It's a small fact but if Greece went down an estimated 7% of entire EU financial liquidity disappears. Drachmas have no value if they were to start again so who would trade with them? Here's a thought, when you look at the 'Law of Unintended Consequences', when Argentina defaulted on its debt back in 2002, 20% of the Italian pension system went with it meaning hundreds of thousands of Europeans lost their life savings. For the UK, we have around £14bn of lending exposed and £3.4bn of Government debt. Money we can afford to lose?

The resultant aftermath of a major default let alone bankruptcy is the cost of borrowing goes up for others. For the other members of the PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) this would be disastrous as they would be the next in line to be cut off. But hovering precariously around the edges are countries like the UK. As we battle our own issues, what a lovely idea that we can be cold-hearted to those in a worse position? The way I Iook at it is that that just bumps us one place forward in the queue of countries next to go on the Credit Rating black list. And what joy that would be for us all.

On this subject, France and Greece each have exposure of $79bn to Greece and Germany a further $43bn. For the knock-on PIGS debt, Britain's exposure to PIGS Government debt is actually the largest in Europe. Of all the PIGS countries, the total debt exposure in the banking system is a mere $2.9 trillion, so no worries if there is a domino effect.

So as we sit here pontificating and gloating as the Unions prepare to make our lives hell as we suck in our breath to make our girth fit our financial belt, we are but a few steps away from a similar fate. The Euro was wishful thinking at best but it's way too late to start bleating about it. We live by the sword in financial terms, we die by it. This isn't like a bank failing, there are no insurance schemes, it is the slippery slope into financial gloom.

Beware, Boris, what you wish for.......

The Congestion Charge Racket

To start, hands up, my wife and I are not great at remembering to pay, which is one of my beefs about the Congestion Charge for London.

But it's way more than that - it's getting like a racket - a licence to print money and the abuse of people's rights is getting silly.

First up - it's an unfair system. My wife only ever goes into the zone for minutes on any day she goes to London and always with another passenger in the car. Yet she is charged the full £8 just the same as a driver-only vehicle who may drive around for the full congestion charge period for the same charge - polluting and contributing to jams the whole day. That's just plain stupid and we should all make a stand to Boris Johnson on this - there is nothing 'green' about the system and it's wholly unfair in terms of usage.

It's not as if the technology does not exist to collect charges at source and dramatically reduce the amount of Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) which are sent out. My wife has an account with a debit mandate attached to it and if she remembers to text in then it debits her account. But we have two cars and so she repeatedly texts for the wrong car which has happened again. She has paid £8 but for the wrong vehicle. Transport for London (TfL) happily takes the wrongly paid £8 and will not refund the money in any circumstance - it's the only authority or company I know which has the right totally abuse the consumer rights law yet it is operated by a private company. It is an absolute licence to print money.

The technology for number plate recognition has been there since the day it was launched and the debit mandates are there for individual accounts - yet the payment system is 'rigged' to make sure you have to trigger something to pay even though TfL can actually do it for you. It's absolutely ludicrous that it should not be done this way.

Here's the new thing. Congestion Charge is neither a traffic offence or is it a consumer purchase so it operates in a middle ground but is protected by the laws of traffic transgression. Yet if you speed, the fine notification has to be sent out within 14 days of the offence occurring - any time after actually transgresses your right to defend yourself and so as 'Mr. Loophole', the famous lawyer who gets rich people off, exploits you do not have to pay and you cannot be convicted. Congestion Charge does not have the same rule, they can send out a PCN at ANY time after the offence has occurred - but technically it's not an offence and so despite the fact you have a right to defend yourself as each week passes it becomes progressively more difficult to get facts. TfL has now sent out the last two PCNs my wife has received, despite her paying £8 in both instances, fully seven weeks after the alleged offences took place. As the first was when she used my car, I called to complain and I was threatened that if I did not pay then the charge would be doubled and I would be prosecuted for non-payment.

The best part is that they are not even Londoners on the end of the line - they are Capita people based in Coventry - fat lot they know or care about London.

So, Boris Johnson, if you bother to listen to your public, listen to this. The Congestion Charge system needs to be properly positioned - and do what it says. If cars only enter the zone for minutes in a day then surely they should pay less for the little they pollute and congest within the charging hours. Surely, if not only as a matter of courtesy, PCNs should be sent out promptly and within a few days, maximum 14 days, of a penalty being incurred so that people can exercise their rights to defend themselves properly. People should have individual accounts and pay for any car on the same mandate just list the cars they may use. It is a simple process which is called customer service. And put the call centre in London - manned by courteous Londoners rather than people who have no knowledge of the City or zero care about Londoners.

Ken Livinsgtone famously had a referendum to see if West Londoners wanted the charging zone extended and in democratic process at its best he ignored the huge majority of 'No's' and went ahead anyway. It makes you think more was at stake than just trying to de-congest or de-pollute London.

So, define whether this is a service we buy or whether it is a transgression system. Like clamping and parking, the Congestion Charge is degenerating into a way for private companies to print money by effectively running it as a racket.

And finally, put the money made back into London rather than giving handsome profits to the private companies who run this - why should they profit so much from it?

The whole system was set up wrong in the first place and makes you wonder how many people associated with TfL had shares in Capita? I wonder if anyone checked as they are the only people benefiting from a service gone wrong.

Facts, Hercule, Facts!

As Peter Sellars' Inspector Clouseau used to shout at his ever patient assistant, Hercule, 'Facts, are what we need!'.

I love a good fact. For instance, did you know that if the entire population of the world were collapsed to just 100, 50% of the currency would be held by just 6 of them. That's the kind of shocking fact I like - 6% of the world's population hold 50% of the currency. Iceland reckoned they could name the 6 individuals who took their country to the brink of bankruptcy, I would like to know the names of the 6 individuals in the shrunken world population who hold 50% of the currency and if they are doing anything for dinner to tonight.

Here's another. The Mall, a large shopping centre in Washington DC is 1.4 times larger than the Vatican City. I would say it's likely that at any time, The Mall contains more Catholics too and I wonder if it has its own Pope? Perhaps it will be the subject of the next Dan Brown book - 'The Pin Code' does not quite have the same ring.

Another. The top 8 most developed countries speak a Germanic language and all such countries are in the top 20. I have to say I was a bit surprised on that one as I had no idea Japanese was a Germanic language but perhaps they have a different list to me. Anyway, ve ask ze qvestions.

Saudi diplomats have 367 outstanding parking tickets in the UK. I dare say if one of us owed a parking fine in Saudi we would have a limb lopped off which is food for thought for Boris Johnson. However, I shall bring that up at my next parking fine and plead precedent.

Turtles can breath through their backsides. That's nothing special really as most politicians can actually speak through their backsides. I can't think why evolution would have dealt that interesting card to turtles but you never know when these things come in handy, perhaps when you are stuck in a pond with your backside in the air? I don't know.

Walt Disney was afraid of mice. Well that stands to reason as the mice he became famous for all had to wear gloves. I heard that Disneyland in Paris was shutdown last week as inspectors found a large mouse in the kitchen.

Male and female rats can have sex up to twenty times a day. Pathetic, I would be only warming up. However, over an 18 month period, a pair of rats could have up to 1 million descendants. I dare say that if I announced I had won the Euromillions Lottery I would have the sum number in 18 minutes.

It took approximately 2.5 million blocks to build the Pyramid of Giza, which is one of the Great Pyramids. Imagine the builder on that, 'Oo, mate, that's gonna cost yer. Them bricks aren't easy to find, you know.' It is a commonly held belief that when constructing Milton Keynes, a roundabout was put in where every navvi had put their tea mug down on the map.

Peanuts are one of the ingredients of dynamite. I can believe that, they used to cause explosive wind in a friend of mine. It's always a friend in these stories, isn't it?

Two final facts - there are more nutrients in the packaging than there are in the contents of a packet of cornflakes. Some would say that the packaging tastes better too. It is impossible for a solar eclipse to last more than 7 minutes and 58 seconds. I like that - there has to be something finite about this Universe.

And finally, for one the chaps. Christmas is coming and did you know that women who read romantic novels have sex twice as much as those who don't? Get down to Waterstones fast, boys.

The Shady Edge Of The Law

The whole point of the Law is to have guidelines in which we all live but its essence is that we have a right to be proven to have transgressed. The cornerstone of our justice system is that we are innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty, and that each of us has the right to some sort of defence.

However, at the edge of the law, there are several 'offences' which are not governed by the legal system - in fact, they are not even administered by the legal system. In these cases, you are simply guilty and the process of appeal against such a 'conviction' is made to be so onerous as to be futile.

I refer to the whole area governing parking, clamping and speeding. I could cite many more examples, but it is the basic principle that courts cannot be bothered to get involved in the volume of alleged offences and so simply transfers the onus to other administrative methods and effectively allows the Law to be interpreted, even hijacked and rewritten, by a bunch of third parties, few of whom are qualified in such matters.

I would like to point out that I have never had my car clamped or towed away but I have a lot of sympathy for those who have. I have heard of people who have had their car clamped for minor transgressions and I have heard of private individuals or companies who have clamped cars who have parked on their property where they have taken little or no effort to forewarn potential transgressors, and then charged fees for release which are purely arbitrary. These are not 'cowboy clampers' that the RAC Foundation wants to get some regulation on, but effectively anybody can clamp cars the way the Law is structured today. Even I can.

The Woolly Rules

A restaurant local to me has a small car park with a sign saying 'Clamping is in operation'. It doesn't say what for, is the first obvious matter. However, many cars park in there and some get clamped and some don't. The some that don't are people known to the restaurateur and have bought meals previously, allegedly. Those that get clamped, are seen as people who just use the facility to go to the shops. However, the notice does not make clear the rules nor does it give any time limits for unauthorised parking, nor does it specify fees for release, nor does it give a number to call for release or to ask questions, nor does it have an appeals service, nor does it make clear that if you have used the restaurant in the past that you may be entitled (at the discretion of the restaurateur) to park when not visiting the restaurant. Then there are those collecting take-aways - it is a potential mine field in the eyes of the Law, but it is beyond the Law.

The loose interpretation of the rules means that a car may be clamped solely if the restaurateur feels like it and it does not take account of the rights of the disabled, as a for instance. If you asked the owner of the restaurant, they would give you a whole load guff and not be able to explain any of the rules at all - it is basically down to their own interpretation, whenever and however they fell like. Then comes the final twist - they are not the landowners. They lease the land from an absent landlord, who has not given them any authorisation to clamp.

The whole business of parking in the country is BIG money. In St Albans, an army of uniformed wardens from a third party company roam the streets and hand out fines liberally with scant regard for rights and none for logic. As a for instance, I was playing golf at Batchwood Park municipal course one day last year and the car park was empty except for about 5 cars, one of which was mine. A warden on a scooter arrived and picked on a car which was parked in a long line of empty parking berths and one of its wheels overlapped the white lines defining the parking berth. Even though this car posed no issue to any other car and did not even stop someone parking in the next booth, the warden proceeded to issue a ticket and take a photo. I was amazed as it is a good mile or so from the town centre so I walked over with my camera phone and took a photo of the warden on the process of doing this and of the surrounding car park. I then asked him why he was issuing a ticket.

The response was that the car was 'illegally parked'. A sign in the adjoining car park warned that this was an 'offence' and is a rule 'known in St Albans' - there was no account taken that the car owner may be a visitor from another town playing golf and so not be aware of the 'St. Albans local Law'. I asked if the warden knew that this car was the original offender and was only parked this way as a result of another car parking 'illegally' previously which forced all other cars to park wrongly but had now left the car park. In such a case, the warden explained, all cars would be parked illegally and so be fined. By extension, if a single car causes a pile up, all cars who crash as a result are liable to prosecution - he said I was talking rubbish. He also radioed to his HQ as my taking pictures of him was deemed 'harassment' and therefore his company would bring criminal charges against me. I asked if, because a single car parked illegally, no other cars should park in an entire car park because all of them were liable to be fined - he said he did not make the rules.

The incident ended when the police arrived and gave me a warning for 'assault' which actually was the act of taking a photo of the warden, even though by this time there were several witnesses to the entire conversation who piped up and said I had only taken a two photos. St Albans wardens are a protected species indeed.

But the point here is that the rules are made up by a faceless body somewhere in the bowels of St Albans Council. It is not my only run-in - my wife was booked while waiting for me in an empty car park which had one other car in and her ticket ran out at 6pm and she was booked while sitting in the car waiting for me at 6.02pm - the warden had waited in the car park for her ticket to expire while the rest of St Albans was snarled in traffic as people parked wherever they liked while this chap picked on a lone female in a dark car park. Witnesses to the incident sent letters on my wife's behalf and there was not even a letter in response.

You could go on for hours on this subject and even start on the incredible decree that security cameras in town centres can now be used to spot parking offences rather than for use in protecting us against violent crime, assault and terrorism. Surveillance in this country is now on the hands of muppets with vendettas and book balancers.

Getting back to the point, clampers are only part of the problem. The issue of parking and speeding fines is one of the areas of law where the right to legal process is foregone and you are guilty with little recourse to prove innocence. In fact, the only way to prove innocence is to pay large legal fees as the appeals process is not a legally defined one - you effectively have to 'sue' the ticket issuer to get a legal hearing.

The article I have referenced makes a reference itself to the Human Rights Act of 1998 which states that all of us are entitled to a legal process no matter what the offence. The Human Rights Act has got a bad press because it allows mass murderers and serial offenders the right to challenge their convictions or give them some sort of right to a fair trial when everyone just wants to see the victims get a similar right. In the case of speeding and parking, all such rights are waived and fines, which are more than the legal ones handed out out for theft and assault, can be handed out liberally with no real recourse to the Law.

I understand there has to be a way for all 'small offences' to be dealt with and to clog up the legal system but I do not believe it should be carte blanche for small Hitlers to make a shed load of money. Speeding fines in this country are handed out at the rate of £250m per day while parking tickets and fines amount to a similar sum. Eager council and police officials see the extension of such fining systems to make money and so the rules governing the whole thing become economically driven, not trying to solve the problem of road safety or how many cars can be parked.

One day, a bright spark lawyer will go pro bono after one fine too far and test this whole grey area of the law to destruction. I am in no way intelligent enough to do so myself but I am intelligent enough to know we are all being taken for a ride. And, currently, there is not a thing we can do about it.

Congestion Charge

As a final point on all this. London Congestion Charge which itself seems to have done little to rid the capital of its traffic problems is an unfair system, administered in a way so that maximum money is made. Not only is the call centre governing the system in Coventry (no jobs for London) and administered by Capita who are making millions out of it, but it is unfair. My wife can travel in a car with more than one person in it which makes it cheaper than using trains. She parks 30 yards inside the zone and then walks 500 yds to her office. She then leaves London after the CC has ended which makes it a long working day and outside the legal hours governing her work which she does not get paid for. If she is 1 minute late parking her car then she gets a full fine. If she pays the £8 or fine, then she has entered the system for just 1 minute while a car that pays £8 or a fine can drive around London during the whole day causing congestion and polluting the air. Naturally, a 'pay as you go' scheme would be too expensive for Capita to design and administer, so we get a system wholly unfair.

I had hoped Boris Johnson would have done something about it but cash speaks louder than sense and fairness in these modern times.