Month: March 2019

The Idiots Guide to Fast Driving

/ Matters Blog - Things that Matter to Me / Leave a comment

The Idiots Guide to Fast Driving

Readers may remember my personal definition of a ‘slow driver’ as someone who drives at or just below the maximum permitted speed limit. These drivers are a curse to those who for whatever reason have set off on a journey without enough time to reach their destination. By an unmeasured observation I would estimate that at least eight or nine out of ten drivers fall into the latter category. For these these drivers, there is good news and bad news.

First the good news. Here are a few pointers to driving fast like an idiot. Tailgating is a favoured driving technique for idiots on the road. When asked if they drive faster when they are close to the vehicle in front or when including a gap to allow for breaking, fast drivers believe that being close is the faster option. This is presumably because they intend to message the ‘slow driver’ in front to speed up even though this is not something they are comfortable with. If there is a ‘speed trap’ ahead, it is not the tailgater who will be awarded a speeding fine. If fast drivers who tailgate need to improve their driving skills then they may wish to learn to overtake.

Tailgater’s are of two types. Those who overtake and those who do not.

I will include a personal story here of a lady driver who tail-gated me for a considerable number of miles including a long straight downhill in which it was safe to overtake. Because of she seemed unable to leave a breaking gap or overtake, I decided to abandon my normal route and take a left into a minor road. To my horror the lady tailgater did the same! Looking in my rear view mirror I indicated my intention to stop with my left indicator and gently slowed down to a stop. To my amazement the lady driver had done exactly the same and was positioned a few yards from my rear bumper. I watched as she was forced to engage reverse gear, stop, indicate and manoeuvre around my stationary vehicle. This is an extreme example of a non-overtaker.

The other affect of non-overtaker tailgaters on other road users is that they prevent other vehicles from overtaking. In the event of say a slow moving lorry travelling under the legal speed limit with a tailgater locked into it’s slipstream, there are now two vehicles to overtake instead of just one. This is considerably more dangerous for those behind the lorry and tailgate but is the only option. If the overtaker behind the tailgater suddenly has an oncoming vehicle appear the overtaker must pull into the safety gap between the tailgater and slow moving lorry. This usually infuriates the tailgater who feels that they have a right to not leave a gap in front of their car to allow others to overtake.

However tailgaters, can be over takers, and this is the second type. To them a slow moving vehicle (usually travelling just under the legal speed limit) is a hinderance to their journey, to be overcome at any cost.

Their first manoeuvre is to tuck in close behind the vehicle in front. If this is a lorry or van or caravan, they will become invisible to the driver in front. The rear view mirrors are unable to view the blind spot extending several car lengths behind. Any emergency stop by the forward vehicle will not take account of any vehicle behind. Any turning left or right at junctions or even an overtake will not be done whilst aware of the tailgater. This is particularly dangerous for motorcyclists who I have rarely seen tailgating, probably for this reason. The ultimate danger is of course the emergency stop or sudden change of speed by the vehicle in front, for which the tailgater will have no warning. Drive into the back of a lorry at your peril.

You would not think that it is not necessary to tailgate on a motorway when the overtaking lane is clear. But the ‘idiot’ driver often finds it necessary to do just this, particularly drivers of lorries and vans. Having driven for hundreds of thousands of miles just a few feet from the vehicle in front, why should anything untoward happen? I have watched vehicles stop on a motorway because two swans have landed and settled down ( later to both appear on Channel 4’s Breakfast show after a rescue by the two presenters in a sports car). I have followed at a safe distance a driver having an epileptic fit. The expression of the two young boys in the rear window as the door handles flew off because of hitting the safety barrier was nothing you want to see. The head on collision into two oncoming lanes of traffic under a bridge when the safety barrier stop, was also something you never want to see.

Lastly, fast drivers have ‘their own’ lane on motorways. It is the outside land. When positioned in this lane and travelling considerably in excess of the legal speed limit, all other vehicles have to give way to you. They cannot pull out in front of you as you approach, and those travelling the same lane but more slowly, they have to pull over to allow you to continue to break the law and pose a risk of a violent death to yourself and others.

So fast drivers, whoever you are, what horrors do you have to experience to make you want to slow down to the legal speed limit? The good news is you may not have to. European Legislation in four years time will mean that new cars will be fitted with technology that will make it impossible to drive above the legal speed limit. I remember this idea being common in Japan several decades ago. An annoying alarm sounded in cars when they went over the maximum permitted speed limit. Now with cameras and automatic breaking, the option of the driver to kill themselves and others by driving too fast is to be taken away.

Some may abhor this idea, as many did when wearing seat belts was made legally compulsory. ‘Why is my civil liberty to kill or injure myself being taken away?’

Those who voted against the power of Brussels to change UK legislation may have also voted against this removal of ‘liberty’, by voting to leave Europe. Why would any self respecting citizen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland want legislation ensuring Human Rights, Protection of the Environment, Animal Welfare and Food Hygiene standards, Consumer Rights, Manufacturing Standards, Food and Fishery Standards and Protection…for themselves and their children’s children? (What did the Romans ever do for us?)

So here comes the ‘bad news’ for fast drivers. In the longer term all cars will become driver-less. All cars will be driven at legal speeds and at safe distances between each other. The reason is that ‘freewill’ has enjoyed itself for too long. Ten people dying on the roads in the UK each day is not acceptable to me, and I suspect neither to the loved ones and relatives of road deaths.

There are plenty of ways a person can enjoy the wind in their hair. Walking up a hill on a windy day is one of them. Face the sun, close your eyes and breath.

I recommend it.

BBC Radio Europe

/ Matters Blog - Things that Matter to Me / Leave a comment

BBC Radio Europe

Wing Commander James Sutton DFC, was given a position in the BBC shortly after the war in July 1946. He had been a bomber pilot and saw first hand much of the destruction of Europe. Perhaps his part in the destruction of the many of the beautiful cities was behind his innovative idea. He said that it was when he kept seeing the slogan ‘Nation Shall Speak Unto Nation‘ over the entrance doorway to the BBC in Portland Place, that he had his vision for a new radio station.

Up until then the Home Service, Third Programme and the Light Programme had been the main stream radio stations. James Sutton proposed the a new radio station take to the air called ‘BBC Free Radio in Europe‘.

The then time Controller liked the concept and a working group was formed within the BBC. After a summer of deliberation in which some promising ideas around farming and fisheries, culture and entertainment, religious affairs, re-uniting families lost during the war and human interest stories from across Europe. Eventually it was the reality of not being able to fund such an ambitious project that stopped further progression.

But in the mid 1960’s another Controller read about the project and believed it was right for the times. There was then a great deal of discussion about the Common Market and whether the UK should join it.

Money was found by cutting some of the more expensive programmes in the World Service under whose direction the new station would be formed. It was to be called BBC Radio Europe with the mission statement;

Bringing Europe together.

There was certainly no shortage of material and quickly a broad menu of programmes was formed. Most well known was the Comedy Hour on Sundays with stars such as Franky Howard and Tony Hancock delivering humour that it was expected Europeans would understand. They did, and quickly the rather saucy, dry and clever wit of the writers adapted their material around European interest.

In Your Garden was to become another staple for European listeners. Presenters would visit well known and less well known gardens and interview gardeners there. A small part of the garden would be focussed on in great detail so that listeners might recreate the ideas and enjoy new planting techniques and garden design.

The list of successful programmes is too long to describe here but the point can be made of how the formation of BBC Radio Europe put it’s finger on the pulse of public opinions, needs and hopes. Where distrust and envy had been barriers to peace before the war, in some small way, BBC Radio Europe enabled all people whatever their culture and geographical background in Europe, to see over the fence and enjoy the company of neighbours.

There is always a slightly darker side as in all new ventures. MI6 were rumoured to have one time requested the ‘time signal pips’ be encoded with secret messages. Some boffin had worked out a way to compress a long string of Morse code into a single beep. Replayed slowly, the pip could be read and British agents across Europe instructed and informed.

The Controller put a complete ban on this idea, claiming it interfered with the principle of the BBC being detached in every way from Government. He was concerned, rightly, that should this technique be discovered the whole integrity of the radio station and perhaps even the BBC’s charter, would be compromised.

As the decades passed into the 90’s and 00’s, BBC Radio Europe became a progressive and instructive voice across the falling boundaries of Europe. Greater emphasis was placed on language skills and building on a common language such as English to bring people together. A spotlight was placed in programme schedules on the one time Soviet Union satellite countries such as Poland, Ukraine and Hungary as well as the minor Baltic States. BBC Radio Europe was believed to have provided valuable support to the people of Germany both prior and after unification of East and West. Families were re-united, reliable breaking news stories broadcast, new political directions for democrats of all parties, were all given a platform to speak.

Combined with the growth of the internet and the world wide web, BBC Radio Europe became a stronger voice then ever before. Many of the programmes were made available on the internet and to download although at first the choice was limited, soon the possibilities expanded into the ‘I-Player’ and ‘Sounds’, we know today.

At one time an ‘European Radio Licence’ scheme was discussed in the European Parliament. The proposal was to evolve BBC Radio Europe into a station controlled independently of all parliaments through subscription, on the lines of the BBC Charter. It would be based in central Europe, maybe somewhere like Lichtenstein, where it would continue to evolve independently and without prejudice towards one way of thinking or another.

The BBC were initially in agreement and indeed a trailblazer for what was in effect a new and very promising income source. The lessons of ‘missing the boat’ over the Pirate Radio evolution in the 1960’s had been learned. This time the BBC wanted to be on the side of the pirates, and rightly so for there was known to be another gathering storm of Nationalism within Europe and across the world.

The continued independence of radio programming was what killed the idea in the end. There was a growing feeling in the management of the BBC that BBC Radio Europe would become a monster which no one could control. They were thinking of right wing influences and quasi government organisations, infiltrating and gaining control of news content and programme scheduling.

Then came the nail that closed the lid on the coffin of BBC Radio Europe. From within the BBC strong right wing influences guided programme controllers and presenters into an agenda of patriotism or perhaps better named nationalism. Forward looking thinkers who had brought BBC Radio Europe into centre stage of ‘fairness and reasonableness’ were replaced by figures looking back to Britain’s Imperial past. This despite the fact that much of Britain’s prosperity is known to have been forged on the back’s of the poor of the so-called third world.

In this new world where borders are once again drawn with the steel pen of walls and border posts, the voice of BBC Europe has failed in it’s once optimistic vision.

BBC Europe will cease to broadcast on the day that the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. This will undoubtedly be a sad day for all citizens, not only of the UK but for the whole of Europe. Peace was bought at a high price in Europe. Radio Stations, you would like to think, are worth more than a sudden closure, after it’s long service to the freedom of the citizens of Europe.

All the above is entirely fictitious. There never was a BBC Radio Europe. Perhaps if their had been and many similar European combined enterprises based on communication and understanding, Europe and the World would be in a better place today.

I am Prime Minister

/ Matters Blog - Things that Matter to Me / Leave a comment

‘Today is the day we hold an historic meaningless vote. Two years ago I went over to the continent and told them what the terms of Brexit would be. At first the EU didn’t like my ‘red line’ attitude but after constant repetition they finally agreed; if only to shut me up (laughs self consciously).

Because no one knew what they had voted for when they voted to leave the EU, I have had to make up the terms of my meaningless Withdrawal Agreement. It’s so fraught with problems that I have had to paint parliament into a corner to get them to vote for it. This hasn’t worked so far but by constantly delaying parliamentary procedure, we are now where I want us to be – at the edge of the abyss.

So today you will all be voting for my deal…as they say on that interesting show Meaningless on tea time telly, ‘a very very good deal indeed‘. You all know the terms by now, as you have voted against them enough times. But as the alternative is falling off the cliff edge, I expect more of you will see that my Brexit is the only way forward.

‘What about a people’s vote?!’

‘I don’t know why I have to explain again but we have had the referendum ages ago. The people voted to leave. It is my mission to give the people what they want, even if the terms and conditions were not considered and  differ enormously from what people expected. But remember, we can’t just keep going back to the people asking the same question until we get the answer we want.’

‘That’s exactly what you are doing with your meaningless vote!’

‘Yes, but I am Prime Minister and I can do whatever I want. And I have told, I mean, agreed with the EU negotiators that every member of this house will strip naked, paint ourselves blue and dance around Parliament Square singing Britain Waves the Rules! That is a much better deal than staying the EU.’

‘No it’s not!’

‘Who said that?’

‘I did.’

‘See me afterwards.’

‘What about all the people who didn’t vote in the first referendum, who want to be heard now?’

‘If you mean women in refugee camps; – we have stripped her of her citizenship, so no longer a problem.’

‘No, I mean the two million sixteen year olds in 2016, who are now eighteen. It’s their future and they have a right to be heard. And then there are the UK citizens who live in Europe and were not allowed to vote on the grounds that this doesn’t concern them because they have lived out the UK for 15 years. Of course it concerns them…them more than anyone else!’

‘A second referendum will bring indecision and divisiveness.’

‘We have indecision and divisiveness now! Surely a second vote will either stop Brexit or give it more impetus and quieten dissenters.’

‘My deal is a very good deal and if you don’t agree to it then you are not being democratic and defending the rule of law and parliament…’

‘Why?’

‘Because I say so, because I am Prime Minister. So are we going to have this meaningless vote or not? Let’s get it over and this time, remember, if you don’t vote for my meaningless deal then you will have to keep voting until you vote in it’s favour.

If you vote for the good of the country instead of my meaningless deal, the repercussions will not be my fault but yours for being very naughty MP’s.

No indecision. Commit yourselves to be stupid and support the most uninformed plan anyone has ever concocted. You must vote and you must vote decisively, May. You may not vote ‘may not’ or wait until May.

Let’s be certain about one thing. I used to tell my teachers at school uncertainty, is not my middle name, it’s my last name.

Strictly Come Democracy

/ Matters Blog - Things that Matter to Me / Leave a comment

Twelve men and their captain leap into the life boats. The timber ship has broken her back on rocks and they have seconds to save themselves. They manage to reach the beach through the crashing waves, pull up the boats and huddle together, shivering. The place is the Antarctic and the man faced with the problem of survival, Captain Ernest Shackleton. The choice is either escape in the boats, or stay and wait for help. They vote. The result is six/six. Captain Shackleton decides that six should camp there under an upturned boat and the rest take the other boat to get help. The outcome of this decision, in which one half of the crew did save the lives of the others, was not divisive but mutually rewarding.

Democracy doesn’t work that way. With a 50 ½ to 49 ½ result, the majority win. In Shackleton’s case, all would have been morally forced to make the perilous journey in an open boat.  The minority clique would moan all the way and constantly demoralise everyone.

The elephant not in the room, during the parliamentary election process, are those who chose not to vote. If you ask them why the replies are;

‘I don’t trust/like politicians’

‘What is the point, the ****** Party will get in anyway’

‘It’s all a load of rubbish’

‘I’m too busy to vote’

‘It’s raining’

‘I walked the dog already so I am not going out again’

We are all familiar with the responses of those asked why they do not exercise their democratic right. Where would Captain Shackleton have been if one third of his men decided not to vote?

How can democracy engage all it’s citizens, as surely it should?

You can enforce voting by law, as in some countries, but this is too close to autocracy for many.

What can you do to voters who decide not to vote on account of the weather? A large part (sometimes the majority) are so disengaged with politics that the winning party are sometimes a minority of those legible to vote. Democracy in the UK has a problem but there is an alternative.

There is another form of democracy which avoids the voting for representatives. It is called ‘direct democracy’.

In Plato’s time the democratic city consisted of no more than 1008 people. This is the number who can stand in a circle and listen to a single speaker. This is direct democracy; no representatives. By removing the ‘middle man’, who is often the cause of the disgruntled not voting, voters are empowered in a directly personal way.

As a side issue, you might also think it odd that in the twenty first century, we vote by making a mark on a piece of paper with a stubby pencil in a makeshift polling booth at the local library. Isn’t that rather old fashioned in an age of global communication? How is it that viewers can vote for their favourite couple on ‘Strictly Come Dancing’ but can’t vote on whether there are too many immigrants or whether to declare war on another country?

I do not know but I expect there are boffin s in the Civil Service working on an Application that is completely secure and personal to each citizen. With it, citizens can vote on political issues, both local and national, regularly. How regularly? Well Switzerland already has four referendums a year and this system is generally praised across Europe for it’s success in engaging it’s citizens in political choice.

And perhaps an Application is not the solution either. After all, not every citizen has a cell phone and we must wait for the ‘My Vote App‘ to appear on everyone’s voice controlled television

Another method of voting for the present, is not to vote for party’s, policies or people. These are all fraught with over simplification and all that brings. Instead a citizen will be empowered to decide how their personal taxes are divided for different government departments. The tax form will have a box for each department ; education, defence, food and fisheries, health etc. Voting for policy is conducted in fine detail through an existing system; annual tax returns.

A citizen ticks only the boxes to which he or she wishes their taxes to be allocated. Three ticks means your tax goes three ways, six ticks separates it six ways…simple. As a result the different government departments might receive a surge in funding to empower them to address issues that citizens tell them deserve money. Not only the cause but the strength of their belief and desire is acknowledge.

Whilst it may be true that money does not solve problems how often in response to criticism have you heard a Prime Minister defend policy by saying how much money has been spent and how this will be increased?

So particularly in a period of ‘austerity’, allocating money to the NHS proportionately to the will of the people would be a huge step forward for Democracy and calm discontent with central government.

It may not be perfect and perhaps there is another way. Living in an age where artificial intelligence is making the decisions that hold the Stock Market together, isn’t it time for AI to help us voice our political choices?

The Platonic city will live again and instead of dropping black or white stones into a container or scribbling on a bit of paper – citizen democracy will move into the age of technology making the impossible, possible. In doing so it will bring together all citizens instead of just those who happen to own an umbrella or need to walk the dog.

Who Owns Knife Crime?

/ Matters Blog - Things that Matter to Me / Leave a comment

Should the citizens of the United Kingdom be afraid? Reading the headlines of the ‘red top’ newspapers – you should be. Because stories involving public violence sell newspapers and whip up politicians.

Why is a branch of violent death suddenly deemed unacceptable, when ten people die in motor vehicles in the UK every day? Clearly there is a tendency for the press and media to focus a spot light on stories that appear as fresh and ‘in the public interest’ i.e. exciting. Statistics showing an increase in knife crime need to interpreted by statisticians and explained to the public intelligently because we all know they often give a false picture of what is going on.

Crime is something most people have an opinion on but few understand. They call a burglary a robbery and a robbery a theft. Journalists often confuse the legal terminology and I expect the man on the omnibus would have trouble as well.

When children are murdering each other there certainly needs to be a debate. I would start that debate on whether the law needs another word for a child on the verge of adulthood. Should a seventeen year old be treated legally as a child when they can join the army and or get married?

Murder using a knife is a specific crime. It is however no different to murder using any other implement in it’s effect. Because firearms are hard to obtain in the UK, it is likely that a similar weapon will be preferred. A knife is certainly the weapon of the bully who uses it to cause intimidation and or cause injury or death. Rarely do cases emerge of a knife fight in which both parties use knives. This shows that those who carry a knife wish to intimidate and win a conflict rather than meet anyone on equal terms. This is bullying at it’s most extreme and behaviour pattern often learnt in the school environment and carried over into adulthood.

So when politicians are asking their civil servants who is responsible for stopping knife crime the answer is not as simple as ‘the police’. Policing is always the last resort. As Police Commissioner Cresida Dick said, ‘we cannot arrest our way out of this problem’.

Police presence as a deterrent does work but only under very specific circumstances. I once asked an ‘old time copper’ how many burglaries he had witnessed in the thirty years he spent walking the streets, he replied, ‘two’. Crimes are not generally omitted in front of the police neither do they tend to ‘come across’ them.

The mayor of New York became famous for reducing crimes on the streets at a time when violent crime was a problem. He did it simply by placing a police officer on each street corner. This had a significant effect on reducing crime in the area where crimes had previously been common. Perhaps they were moved elsewhere – deflected – some like shop lifting would be. This model however cannot always be copied and used elsewhere. It’s matter of police numbers.

So for once in my view, the UK Prime Minister, Teresa May is correct. There are many reasons for a spate in knife crime and all those with a handle on the problem need to get together. More police on patrol might have an effect in the short but random patrols – even targeted patrols – are modelled on military tactics and not part of a long lasting solution.

Who then are the owners of the ‘knife crime’ problem?

Parents

Relatives

Friends

Peers

Teachers

Social Workers

Youth Workers – Sociologists and Academic Researchers

Faith Leaders

Drugs Councillors

Mental Health Professionals

Prison Officers

Public Transport Operators and Staff

Entertainers – e.g. Rap Performers

Social Media Service Providers

Architects, Planners and Developers

Local Councils – Town Centre Managers, Retailers

Local Councils – Youth Services, Educational Establishments, Sports e.g. Martial Arts Teachers

The General Public – potential witnesses

Politicians

Police

The list is probably too short. You might think of others but my point is that the strands of the problem are complex and no single action will contribute to a reduction of the problem.

In each murder there will be some parties and partners who had the chance to impact on the likelihood of an individual child committing a murder. Parents probably top the list because of their intimacy in a family environment and ability to monitor the influences, moods, thoughts, companionship, peer demands, social freedoms and restrictions and every other aspect of their children’s lives.

The topic is considerably more complicated than focusing on gang culture and the use and supply of drugs – but these factors are certainly a part of the problem.

In the last few decades, Youth Services such as Youth Clubs and Sports Centres have been decimated by successive governments. I heard an interview with a man who lived in an area of London where gang culture ruled the streets for young people. He cited the start of the problems with the closure of the Youth Club and annual outings out of the city in which young people came together.

He had brought several warring gangs together through music. Young people who hated each other for reasons no more scary than geography i.e. territory came together to play music, sing and dance. It worked. He should be given a medal.

Drugs are inevitably a significant factor in the power and control of the gangs over their members. They are forced to operate in Mafia style battles over territory and people. Laced through this nightmare are the selling and consumption of illegal drugs that perpetuate the horror and force drug users and gang members into an downward spin.

Just because drugs are hard to control does not mean they are not part of the problem. This is an area where police do hold a significant strand and their powers to stop and search suspects need to be encouraged and used to the full. Local residents usually know exactly where drug dealing and users operate and good intelligence will empower police.

The fact that the victims and perpetrators are often under the age of eighteen is something for society to be deeply shamed about, for they have access to educational facilities and some sort of home lives which children in many poorer countries do not have.

There is not room to discuss even a small aspect of this problem here. One can only expect that the consensus amongst politicians is to do something other than spend money on knee jerk solutions.

Problems that evolve slowly with social change usually require slow time remedies. The public need to be told this and reminded of their duty to step up to their own responsibilities as shared owners of the problem.

How to Lose the Lottery

/ Matters Blog - Things that Matter to Me / Leave a comment

I remember times in the UK when there was no National Lottery. When I went to Australia I considered it quirky that there was a ‘Loto’ which concentrated the attention of the masses once a week. Profits went to social causes, one assumes, like taxes do, one assumes.

Not surprising then, that some regarded Lotteries as a form of voluntary tax. The logic of the possibility of owning more money than you can dream of for the expenditure of just one dollar, is too much. It is logical to enter a lottery, yes, because without a ticket you do not have a chance of winning.

What the Lottery advertising does not suggest is that the chance of winning can be questioned. The question is obviously, how likely am I to win the lottery? For the simple mind without any grasp of statistics or even arithmetic, this question is difficult. Surely, this would spoil the fun and why not, just take a chance?

Even when told that the chances of winning the National Lottery in the UK presently are fourteen million to one, precious pounds are handed over for an empty promise every week by many not really able to afford it. Their dreams have the better of them. Selfish desires are strong motivators.

I expect if they climbed aboard my ‘Reality Bus’ they might see the light. This bus, you see, will drive you passed a football stadium in which have been invited fifty thousand people. They sit in silent expectation, each reviewing their plans for what to do with the millions they hope to win. The guide on the Reality Bus asks how many of those in the stadium might win the lottery. Sun hats are removed as heads are scratched and partners quiz each other.

Is it a trick question?

Well, of course it is because at this moment the bus revs into life. After a few minutes it stops at the entrance to another identical stadium. Inside the stadium can be heard the discourse of another fifty thousand hopefuls. The same question is asked? Some on the bus begin to wonder how many more of these football stadiums there are. And they are correct to do so. All through the morning and afternoon, the bus drives up to another one hundred football stadiums each bristling with like minded people to those on the bus. The bus passengers are beginning to think about dinner. They are let off at the one hundred and first stadium to use the facilities. Some grab a quick pie and a beer on their way back onto the bus. The driver is keen to move on. He has done this journey many times and knows that they are going to be going through the night visiting another hundred identical stadiums.

Come breakfast time the passengers are looking tired and bewildered. How could there possibly be so many football stadiums full of people who are ALL expecting to win the same lottery?

The driver insists they have to drive on and by mid afternoon the bus stops at the two hundred and eightieth stadium. The guide stands up and holds the microphone to address the weary passengers.

‘So far we have passed by fourteen million people all expecting to win with a similar ticket or tickets that you purchased. I have to ask you now, how lucky do you feel?’

This is the point of the whole journey and the moment when the bus passengers finally understand the waste of money and time they have devoted to the purchase of a lottery ticket.

A voluminous hand of fate hangs over the audiences seated in the 280 football stadiums one by one. A clever inflatable ‘hand’ suspended from a helicopter provides this metaphor. As it leaves each stadium having conducted no positive selection, the crowds get up and leave in a dismal mood. ‘It’s not even as interesting as a nil nil footy match’ one hopeful contestant is heard to say.

At the 79th stadium, one lucky contestant is selected amongst whoops of joy from the winner – and moans of envy from the other 49,999 in the stadium.

The Reality Bus completes it’s journey with a visit to Mr. Mind Guru. This is an man from India who sits on a huge golden cushion in a small marquee. The bus passengers are seated on carpets and served tea and biscuits which they gulp hungrily. The guru explains that the secret of a happy life is not to be different to others by being ‘filthy rich’ – he almost spat out the words. The secret of eternal happiness is to cherish the things and people with whom and which one is surrounded. ‘Isn’t it?’

Despite the convoluted English, the audience confer and sort of understanding, as well as they are able following their sleep deprivation.

The audience are invited to burn their lottery tickets and pledge to give materially and with their time to as many worthy causes as they wish in some other way. This will bring them the greatest happiness – so they are told.

‘More happiness than all the tea in India – more happiness than in a selfish thought or a comparison of oneself with another.’

The audience trickle out of the marquee. Time has not been wasted. It has been a very truthful lesson.

The bus heads back to the first football stadium where another fifty hopefuls take their seats, for what they are told will be ‘the ride of your life’. Just49,950 hopefuls to be enlightened, from this stadium before the bus moves onto the next.