Veni vidi da Vinci


Resisting anything but temptation, restraint is futile particularly when there’s a luscious lake from which to fish out opportunities to grow.

David Cameron seemed perplexed last year when he was wheeled out of each tête-à-tête with his opposite numéreaux essentially having evolved nothing in renegotiating terms by which Britain placed itself amid the European Union. This lack might have told him something about the EU appetite to mop Britain’s brow and cater to whimsical idiosyncracies.

After a good few centuries, Britain’s epoch of treating the rest of the world as it treated India up until Partition is over. This cannot have been more starkley demonstrated than by voisins’ voracious vocalizing to speed the triggering of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and begin ejection.

As the Prime Minister’s finger has never been sensitive to the pulse of change, it’s understandable he seems not yet to have discerned that everything is now altered. The more gracefully the UK steps aside giving another a turn at global plutocracy, the more strength and stability is retained and gained.

There is every hope this severe pruning to the country’s self esteem will support luscious growth in its compassion and humanity. It won’t be pretty, nor pain free. Ultimately though, it is plausible to posit a future of kindness and a modicum of humility.


Women, know your place

Standard Crystal balls?

©                                                              Crystal balls?

Beyond the realm of possibility is always a comfortable, sofa-like spot; less sagging towards the middle than grooved by the contours of its owner’s reality. Goodness, we seem to have diverted into metaphysics when this is supposed to concern creaking evolution time maieuts.

It might have passed you by but last week, the British Prime Minister was trapped in a media storm of protest that he might have benefitted from his father’s high- stepping financial arrangements. Now, it just so happens I don’t give a flyer about other people’s affairs, financial or otherwise: I think there’s much to be said for privacy.

But the corollary of all this scrutiny on the head honcho seems to have required all the other politicos to bow to the pressure and reveal their tax returns similarly.

Why does this matter? Well, there could be a plausible argument which states if tax affairs are to be aired, as they are in the States where salaries are publicly discussed and women receive approximately 79% [DC is 90% and New York by which I’m guessing they mean Manhattan, it’s 87%] of their male colleagues, then the pay gap, current level of 76% here might move a mite further? It’s very shrouding from past scrutiny may have added weight to the troublingly toiled lid?

Clearly, there are leagues to go on the journey to parity, but I can’t help thinking the consequence of this exoteric frankness is a step in the right direction?