TRAVEL PRODUCTS

I have mentioned before the case of Scottish shelled prawns which reach our supermarket shelves via Thailand. It is just a fact of globalisation life that wages in Asia are generally lower than the West - so much lower in fact that it is profitable to fly prawns 12,000 miles to take advantage, rather than subject them to the price mark-up they'd incur if well-paid Brits peeled them. So is this in fact appalling?  Or is it good economic sense?  Are we exploiting Thai workers and putting Brits out of work, or are we supporting the Thai economy and helping to contain British inflation?

This topic came to the fore again recently with the discovery that the ingredients used in the manufacture of Slazenger tennis balls for Wimbledon had travelled a total of 50,570 miles to the courts. We were all expected to shout 'shock, horror' at this revelation (or some such comment). But the fact is this is just another example of globalisation and a beneficial one. Thanks to siting their factory in the Philippines, most of the materials used in the manufacture of the tennis balls cone from nearby producers, such as Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and of course China. Had the factory still been in the UK, the 50,000 mile total would easily have been exceeded (and of course the present costs). But who knew that it took 14 ingredients from 12 countries to make a tennis ball?! My only slight disappointment is that the wool comes from New Zealand and is flown to the UK for weaving before being flown to the Philippines. Surely we can produce wool in the UK? That would reduce the travel a little. Ironic that in that case British wages are acceptable for the processing of wool. I suppose it's also a shame that the balls are then only used for about 20 minutes before being discarded. So, after flying over 50,000 miles to get to Wimbledon, the balls then fly less than half a mile before they're finished with. Perhaps that’s the real crime?

While I was wondering what I really felt about the state of affairs that filled our airports with unpeeled prawns and tennis balls, burning expensive aviation fuel and occupying valuable runway slots, which ultimately push up the price of my holiday travel and cause demands for airport expansion in my green and pleasant land, I looked at the sandwich I had just made myself for lunch.

Today I was eating humus with beetroot, a delightful combination that would have been unthinkable some years ago, especially with the delicious sun dried tomato and olive bread I was using. So is this collection of delightful taste sensations a benefit of globalisation or am I a victim of supermarket marketing and responsible, through my encouragement of modern manufacturing methods, for the rape of poor Third World workers, the wanton squandering of precious resources and global warming?

We have a tradition in the UK of importing from all over the world. From at least the 16^th century, Britons were addicted to sugar (from the West Indies) and spices (from India), not to mention tea and chocolate and tobacco. In fact, although the use of aircraft is a relatively recent phenomenon, most of our food products are now imported, apart from the very basic ingredients (although many basic ingredients are also imported – we currently have a juniper disease for example which means that this very British ingredient – essential to our gin! - is currently imported from Bulgaria). I mention this in particular, since my beetroot was flavoured with onion and juniper berries. The humus had added flavouring ingredients too - lemon and coriander.

So I had the humus with ingredients from I reckon 10 different countries, including India, Argentina and South Africa, the beetroot used ingredients from 5, including Barbados and Vietnam, and the bread also from 5, mostly European, although we do import some salt from Australia. I am assuming that many ingredients, such as the beetroot, flour and water, etc, came from somewhere local. No guarantee of course, but, with that assumption, I calculate that my sandwich had travelled 66,520 miles before I got to eat it. More than a tennis ball!

I hadn't thought before how delicious it is destroying the planet.

SNOW FUN

Here we go with another series of blogs with titles punning on the word 'snow'.  Actually, I hope we aren't going to have that; not because of the writing you understand, but because I don't want all the misery of all that white stuff again.

I had to go up to London yesterday.  We have had a house guest for the last 2 weeks and I offered to travel with her up to London and get her and her suitcase onto a taxi.  One of the sad features of travel in this country is that there is hardly any provision on trains or in stations for travellers with suitcases.  If you arrive at a mainline station in London and want to pop into the toilet, how do you get your suitcase down all the stairs that lead to the inevitably subterranean, and misnamed, conveniences?  And what do you do with your suitcase while you use the facilities?  And, even before that, where do you put your suitcase on the train?  If you are going to an airport, you inevitably have to travel on the train when it is packed to the gunnels with commuters.  I once went to Heathrow on the train.  Lovely to have an underground train that speeds you to the airport, but by the time I had stood on trains and lugged my suitcase around for a couple of hours, I had had enough.  Next time taxi! I promised myself.

Anyway, yesterday, first thing in the morning, it decided to snow.  Fearing problems on the road, we arranged for a taxi to collect us and take us to the station.  Fearing problems on the railways, we set off at 10.15, instead of 12.15.

The roads were fine.  Actually the journey to London was OK; we caught the 10.15 train from Haslemere which arrived at the station at 10.45 and reached London before 12.00.  Not too late, although perhaps I should have been suspicious at that stage that things would only get worse.  But it had actually stopped snowing by 09.30 and it hadn't laid anyway, the roads were clear and dry.  Unfortunately, it had obviously been the wrong sort of snow.

We had a coffee at Waterloo to warm ourselves up and I put my friend onto a taxi, with suitcase, at about 12.30.  I then took advantage of being in the Big City by going to Oxford Street and doing some Christmas shopping.  I wanted to find something appropriate for She Who Enjoys Aerobics.  Eventually, in Lillywhites, I found just the thing - they were selling off sports socks at half price.

Anyway, that's a digression.  Having finished all my Christmas shopping for this year, I got back to Waterloo at 1.30 to take the train back home, only to discover that there were no trains on the indicator board stopping at Haslemere.  There was no explanation for this.  There were two of my usual trains departing within the next hour, but both missed out my station.  I went to the information desk and asked their advice.  They rather helpfully suggested I didn't go to Haslemere.  There are trains to Woking and Guildford,  I pointed out.  'Might I be able to board a train from there to Haslemere?'  'No idea', was the sympathetic response.

I know we ask this every year, but how does this happen?  And given that the smallest and shortest-lived dusting of snow imaginable can totally knock out the entire rail network of Britain (well, Haslemere anyway), why can they not be prepared and able to rectify the problem?  And maybe more to the point - why doesn't the information desk know anything or have any advice? 

I bought myself a sandwich and stood there for half an hour watching trains going everywhere but Haslemere.  Eventually, I decided to take the train to Guildford.  At the worst, She Who Will Receive a Rather Fetching Pair of Socks for Christmas could come and pick me up.  Then, just as I was entering the platform, Haslemere appeared on the list of stations at which the Guildford train intended to stop.  I jumped on exultantly.  But an hour later, at Guildford, the conductor (or driver, not the lady who speaks the names of the stations anyway - she was still saying 'the next station is Haslemere') announced that the train wouldn't after all stop at Haslemere.  Again, no idea why not.

As I got off the train, a station employee (guard?) was waving everyone onto the train on the next platform - 'all stations to Portsmouth.  Hurry!'  So I boarded that.  'This train stops at Southsea', assured the lady over the tannoy.  'Actually it goes to Portsmouth Harbour,' contradicted the conductor (or driver).  I quite thought the female announcer was going to start arguing a la Airplane! 'Oh no it's not; it's going to Southsea!'. 

But it did stop at Haslemere.  So it took an hour to go to London, but it took 3 hours to return home.  And still I don't really know why.

Ah well, in 2 weeks time the days will start to get longer and it'll be spring soon after.

NO SIGN OF GETTING UP TO SPEED

There has been a bit of a debate here about speed limits on Britain's roads.  We're not like Texas, where an 85mph speed limit has just been approved on one road, since we don't have long, straight, undeveloped stretches of road of that sort.  But we do have Motorways which are built to accomodate fast driving.

The national limit (on Motorways) is 70mph.  This limit was decided at a time when many cars only just managed 70mph.  The Motorways were also half empty.  I remember driving up the M1, the first Motorway to be built here, soon after it opened, just to try it out.  I did manage a little over 70mph, but then I hardly saw another vehicle.  Nowadays, very, very few drivers take any notice of the 70mph limit.  I recently drove round part of the M25, at speeds rarely under 80mph, and I was overtaken continuously.  But we now have seat belts, disc brakes, obstruction sensors, collision control, engine braking systems, and many other safety devices which make driving at high speed much safer than it was in my young days.  Drivers are far more likely to have an accident from not paying attention (usually because they are on the telephone or playing with their GPS or trying to break one finger off a Kit Kat), than they are from speed alone.

One proposal being discussed in Government is that the limit on Motorways now be raised to 80mph.  This may ease congestion.  But, frankly, all it will probably do in reality is recognise the actual average speed of modern drivers.  The police don't pay too much attention to speeding these days, unless some other element makes it dangerous driving or unless the driver is fleeing a crime scene (such as the Lamborghini-powered Audi the other day that was outrunning a police helicopter at speeds of up to 200mph).  The Deputy Prime Minister is in favour of this change, but many in his own party even are against.  We don't know what the Conservative part of the Coalition thinks about this (if it thinks about road speeds at all at the moment).

I have complained before about frequent changes in the speed limit on certain roads.  The limit is normally 70 on a dual carriageway, 60 on a single carriageway and 30 in towns (occasionally 20).  Vans, buses, goods vehicles, etc have different restrictions.  Occasionally, the limits are reduced because the road passes an area where there might be slow traffic or pedestrians.  In Findon, for example, there is a long stretch of dual carriageway where the speed limit is 60mph because there are slip roads into and out of a school.  I have never understood how 60 is safer than 70 passing a school, but there it is.  And there are 13 changes between here and Petersfield, a 20 minute journey I undertake often.  One minute there is no limit, then suddenly it is reduced to 40mph in a village, then 50 again up to the next village, then 20 for the centre of a small town en route (another proposal has been for all town centres to be restricted to 20mph; the Lib Dem part of the Coalition likes this, but I'm not sure it carries much weight otherwise), then back up to 70 for a short rural stretch, etc.  Needless to say, many drivers either don't understand or don't take any notice.  It is a confusing hotch-potch.

But the main point about these speed limits, which doesn't yet seem to be recognised officially, is that each is accompanied with large signs on both sides of the road, in an attempt to inform and warn drivers.  That's 13 sets of signs on a mostly rural Hampshire road.  And, where the speed limit exceeds 30mph, there will be 'repeater' signs at intervals to remind you of the higher limit.  In some villages, where there is no street lighting and therefore no lamp posts to tell you this is a built-up area, there  will be regular repeater signs right through the village.  That's some 20 sets of signs, or 40 signs in each direction, or 80 signs altogether, on a 20 mile stretch of road.  The entire country is littered with speed restriction signs, 'no limit' signs and repeater signs.  Not to mention signs announcing other road restrictions, warnings, directions, etc.  This is the now famous stretch of the A3 just up the road from here.

Note the speed camera in amongst that lot, as if you'd spot what the speed limit is, as you drove past.  Now consider the improvement if large numbers of these signs were removed.  This is far more important than faffing around with changing speed limits (and presumably adding new signs accordingly).

So, here's my proposal.  You can have it for nothing, Dave and Nick.  Make all Motorways and dual carriageways 80mph, all other main roads 60mph, all rural and minor roads 40mph, and all town centres 20mph.  No exceptions.  There are always signs anyway saying 'pedestrians' or 'hospital' or 'school' or even 'elderly people', so we don't need those backed up with another sign saying 'that means you should drive slowly; ie 40mph'.  In other words, let's take ALL the speed signs away.

As you enter a Motorway, there are signs telling you that there is no speed limit (ie 70mph).  Why?  There are no exceptions on any Motorway in the whole country.  Take them away!  Under my scheme, if there's a main road, no need to post signs all the way along it to remind you of the speed limit; it's 60mph.  If there are likely to be young or especially elderly pedestrians, you are more likely to see the single sign warning of that and to slow down, than if the sign is lost in a sign forest or if you have sign fatigue and have begun to ignore them.

Meanwhile I shall continue to floor the accelerator and let the car's onboard computer do the driving.  In fact this post has been entirely written by the car's onboard computer and not by my driver at all.