Author: Anthony Zacharzewski

  • I have always hated the current set of UK coins.

    I have always hated the current set of UK coins. Definitely feels like it was a straw in the wind on half-thought-through gimmick policies.
    “They make the Royal Arms if you lay them on a table 🄲”
    “But they are unusable for non-English speakers”
    “Who cares about them?” twitter.com/Feanan/status/…

    Yes I bring the receipts twitter.com/anthonyzach/st…

    *All* the receipts twitter.com/anthonyzach/st…

  • Internal floors coming out in the old CitroĆ«n showroom (soon to be a new modern art…

    Internal floors coming out in the old Citroƫn showroom (soon to be a new modern art gallery).

    Video on Twitter

    This is its last incarnation as a car showroom

    But it is now being restored to its original state as a single high space.

  • Everything old is new again.

    Everything old is new again. This idea came up when I worked on business regulation and it’s stupid because it HURTS small producers by creating a race to the bottom on quality and safety, trashing their reputation. twitter.com/rowenamason/st…

    If you are a high-quality producer, do you want some chancer making the same product as you for 5% less with a much higher risk? Why would you want that? Are you going to cut your standards or maintain them and risk this guy putting your product on the front page of the Mail?

    If you’re an employer, do you want to screw your staff over on working time or health and safety? Maybe it will save a few quid, but how much will it cost you on staff loyalty or turnover? It empowers the worst employers and hurts the best.

    What about if you’re a mid sized producer? Are you going to hire that 501st person and have all the rules you’ve ignored so far suddenly hit you? Look at the number of businesses who hover under the VAT threshold for your answer.

    This is bad for businesses, bad for consumers, bad for workers. Like the tax cuts, it’s ideological nonsense that doesn’t work in the real world, but unlike the tax cuts we don’t have the markets to slap some sense into the UK government.

  • Plot one but two push alerts on the local news about Truss’s interview this morning.

    Plot one but two push alerts on the local news about Truss’s interview this morning. Global Britain cut-through!

    For those who don’t read Dutch, the first reads ā€œLiz Truss’s week of blunders. ā€˜Never has a government shot itself in the foot so quicklyā€™ā€.

    The second, ā€œPound in freefall, panic in the banks and a stuttering PM Liz Truss. What on earth is going on in the UK?ā€

    The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about, right?

  • Links from the week of 26 September 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Thinking sadly that if Eurostar are basically having to squeeze max money out of their…

    Thinking sadly that if Eurostar are basically having to squeeze max money out of their seats and maintain reduced services for years to come, that my work will naturally skew even further away from the UK.

    It’s a logical business decision on their part, just another nail driven in by Brexit. I enjoyed my London day trips for meetings and seeing people but at 400€ a go (Paris: 184€, Amsterdam 62€ for same dates next week) they are going to get a lot less frequent.

    I had hoped it was a temporary Covid recovery thing but from the sounds of the Eurostar letter to Commons transport committee, it’s the new normal.

  • Links from the week of 19 September 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Early start for Lucerne

    Early start for Lucerne

    6h30 for a 6h30 train ride to Basel.

    London Blackfriars still has the best urban view but the Reichstag from the Hauptbahnhof isn’t bad.

    Golden morning light crossing the Elbe.

    Frühstuck.

    The glittering towers of Frankfurt-am-Main. Very much appreciating the sunshine today.

    Frankfurt 2: Frankfurter.

    Baden-Wurttemberg village scenes

    Next stop Basel and heading out of the EU.

    The clean lines of Basel SBB

    Train cancelled but there’s another 15 minutes later. On to Luzern!

    Zofingen looks pretty.

    Swiss scenery – almost there.

    And here we are!

  • I appreciate it’s not polite to reply by QT, so apologies, but this is an important point.

    I appreciate it’s not polite to reply by QT, so apologies, but this is an important point. If there are 200k elected officials in Germany, they are by far NOT the only people to have influence on political decisions. twitter.com/thorsten_sterk…

    Aside from voters and party members, to whom all those elected officials are ultimately accountable, there are also lobbyists, media owners and writers, thinkers, researchers, civil servants, campaign groups, and individual citizens all of whom influence decisions in some way.

    Add to that the bureaucrats who implement the decisions and are accountable to the elected officials, and there are a huge number of influencers involved in any political decisions. Elections are about far more than choosing decision makers, they are about choosing

    people to be the key point in those influencing and decision making systems, and allowing those key people to be ejectable by citizens at any time (some systems enable this better than others). They are also about choosing between parties that act as

    synthesisers of policies around a political position, without which it is easy to have incompatible policy positions – and those policies themselves are put together through negotiations with party members and influential groups – climate campaigns for Greens, businesses for EPP.

    Unless you are claiming that all politicians are elite because they are in positions of power, which is a circular argument, I think you will find that a lot of those politicians particularly at municipal level, are not at all from privileged or elite backgrounds.

    I don’t disagree that the majority of senior politicians are likely to be from strong academic backgrounds, have good networks, are possibly rich, but I would say probably not more so than those in senior positions in non-political positions.

    And I also agree that decision makers need to hear a wider range of voices, and more diverse voices – but there are many ways to do that without a blank-page rebuild of the way in which we take political decisions.

  • Just watched the opening speeches at the @DemNext_ launch event from last night (on…

    Just watched the opening speeches at the @DemNext_ launch event from last night (on YouTube via their Twitter account and well worth a watch), and @ClaudiaChwalisz‘s vision of what the sortition-governed future could like got me thinking about numbers.

    The question I wanted to answer is how often would an average citizen be likely to be called to serve, and how many “veterans” or currently-serving people would they be likely to know.

    I decided to plug my home country into a spreadsheet. Belgium has 11 million people and a famously multi-layered governance structure, so lots of opportunities. I also assumed that 20% of the population were not of voting age.

    The top level is the Federal Government. Let’s assume a Federal executive assembly would be 300 people (twice the size of the current Federal Parliament). With annual selections you would be selected every 30 891 years.

    We then have five regions (Flanders, Wallonia, Brussels, German-speaking region and the Wallon-Brussels Federation – I told you it was complicated). If there are 200 people on a regional executive assembly, you get selected every 9 267 years.

    Then, there are ten provinces (Brussels is in historic Brabant but is a region not a province, so I discounted it). If each provincial executive assembly has 100 members, your chance of selection is once every 8 067 (and never in Brussels).

    Finally, 581 communes from Antwerp (500k people) to Herstappe (79). Some are divided into districts so I’ve upped the number to 700. If each local executive has 75 members, your average chance of selection is once every 177 years – though it’s every year if you live in Herstappe!

    There are of course also lots of topic-specific panels on things like judge appointments (to use Claudia’s example), so we have to make some assumptions there too.

    I’ve assumed that each panel is half the size of the relevant Executive Assembly, and that there are 40 at federal level, 30 in each region, 20 in each province and 10 in each locality each year.

    In total, that means that the chance of serving on any one of those bodies in any given year is 3,2% – so in other words you might be selected every 31 years, or twice in your adult life (at all, not to a specific Assembly).

    On assumptions about sizes of family and friends group, you could expect someone in your extended family to serve every 2-3 years, and if you have 100 friends, 3 of them would be serving at any one time, so by middle age half of your friendship group would be veterans.

    Because there are two levels of selection, if we assume a 10:1 ratio in first invitation responders to second invitation then you could expect an invitation letter for something every three years or so, but nine times out of ten you would not be selected.

    How does that compare numerically to the Belgian system? Not every part of the Belgian system is directly elected (some of the regional bodies and the provincial councils aren’t directly elected), and there are local, regional and national elections on a regular timetable.

    If you live from 18 to 80, on these assumptions about sortition you will be invited 20 times and serve twice. On the current system you will vote about 34 times (12 times each for region and federal, 10 times for the 6-year commune councils).

    Now, voting is a very different sort of democratic transaction from being invited to take on actual political power in an executive assembly, but one of the challenges for the sortition-only model for me is whether people are going to be prepared to give up

    a less-effective vote every five or six years for a much more powerful role in a process (that they can’t select) at two random points in their life, and maybe not at all.

    It goes without saying that there are huge caveats here. If there are 400 or 4000 national panels rather than 40 that changes the numbers – it depends on what level of decision would need a panel and which would be left the to bureaucracy.