Music Round Table - How it started

This series is a dive into the music round table archives, collating some of the tracks we shared from across a vast spectrum of genres and moods.

You can learn more about these blog posts here, or just continue to have a read and have a listen.


Top tracks shared back in February 2018. Not sure if this was the start of the project, but it’s the earliest records we can find!


Todd Terje – “Inspector Norse”

This track by Norwegian DJ and producer Todd Terje is a vibrant journey through disco-infused electronic soundscapes. With pulsating rhythms and playful synths, “Inspector Norse” invites listeners to let loose and dance, capturing the pure spirit of a night out.

Listen on YouTube | Listen on AppleMusic | Listen on Spotify

Ariel Pink – “Another Weekend”

Ariel Pink’s “Another Weekend” is an ode to the surreal nostalgia of dream-pop. Its lo-fi textures and haunting melodies take listeners on a bittersweet trip through the fleeting nature of time and the longing for lost moments.

Listen on YouTube | Listen on AppleMusic | Listen on Spotify


The Comet Is Coming – “Journey Through the Asteroid Belt”

“Journey Through the Asteroid Belt” by The Comet Is Coming is a bold exploration of “apocalyptic jazz,” blending saxophone and synths in a cosmic explosion of sound. This track transports listeners into uncharted musical space, where rhythm and melody fuse into a euphoric, otherworldly experience.

Listen on YouTube | Listen on AppleMusic | Listen on Spotify

King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard – “Sleep Drifter”

Australian psych-rock band King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard experiment with microtonal tuning in “Sleep Drifter,” creating a hypnotic and slightly off-kilter effect that draws listeners into a trance. The track’s rhythmic pulse and hazy vocals create a sound that’s both surreal and strangely soothing.

Listen on YouTube | Listen on AppleMusic | Listen on Spotify

Franz Ferdinand – “Always Ascending”

A recent yet nostalgic return to form, Franz Ferdinand’s “Always Ascending” captures the essence of post-punk with an irresistible groove. With its addictive melody and punchy beat, the track is a fresh reminder of the band’s unique ability to blend angst and energy.

Listen on YouTube | Listen on AppleMusic | Listen on Spotify



D.D Dumbo – “Satan”

D.D Dumbo’s “Satan” is a powerful indie-rock track that builds slowly, layering complex rhythms and haunting vocals. Despite its dark title, the song is vibrant and full of energy, proving why D.D Dumbo’s work resonates deeply with listeners who crave something intense yet artful.

Listen on YouTube | Listen on AppleMusic | Listen on Spotify



Eric Whitacre – “Cloudburst”

Composer Eric Whitacre’s “Cloudburst” is a choral masterpiece, a piece that evokes the sensation of standing beneath a looming thunderstorm. Featuring hand claps and haunting harmonies, it captures the beauty and power of nature in one mesmerizing composition.


If you liked this, let me know and I’ll do more posts like this.

Reflections on Cultural relativism

The original idea for this post turned into a bit of an essay so I’ve decided to split it into two. This first one covers my experience learning about cultural relativism. The next covers cultural relativism as applied to asset management (i.e. my day job).

As I’ve gotten older, I’ve realised the value in combining my experiences rather than trying to keep parts of my life totally separate.

Sometimes this is described as “bringing our whole selves to everything that we do” in contrast to “wearing different hats” for the different roles we play in life.

I wouldn’t say it’s better to be all one or the other- but instead I’m trying to have the right balance that works for me, and helps me to deliver at my best.

In this regard - something I spend a lot of time thinking about in my role as a charity director at The Watford African Caribbean Association, is culture.

TL;DR

  • Ethnocentrism, the idea that one’s own culture is superior, stems from ignorance.

  • Cultural Relativism helps us understand that there is no “universal” standard for right or wrong.

  • We can still seek to define right from wrong, but we should avoid assuming that something is wrong because it is different.

  • A more inclusive understanding of culture leads to better outcomes for everyone.

Cultural Ethnocentrism

The Watford African Caribbean Association is all about creating a positive impact in Watford and the surrounding areas whilst celebrating our African and Caribbean heritage.

Unfortunately, this means we occasionally run into people who object to the celebration of our heritage. The attitude is generally summarised as ‘if you’re in Britain then you should assimilate entirely to British values’.

Although the typical person holding these views wouldn’t likely describe it as such, this is known as ethnocentrism: the idea that one’s own culture is superior.

Generally this originates in ignorance of the many positive (and sometimes superior) aspects of other cultures, born from institutional and social biases (it’s normal to know the more about your own immediate “tribe” than that of others who are further away).

But also relevant is a phenomenon that has been described as the epistemology of ignorance (from “The Racial Contract” by Charles W. Mills) : the idea that rather than viewing ignorance simply as a passive absence of knowledge, ignorance can be an active, often intentional, aspect of society that shapes power dynamics, social structures, and systems of oppression of some groups or empowerment of other groups.

When certain information is intentionally obscured, de-emphasised, or denied, we create cultural blind spots that reinforce dominant perspectives and maintain social inequalities.

Mills wrote about ignorance in the context of race, but the mechanism described has philisophical similarities to feminism and the idea of the patriarchy, and is generally useful in understanding how we, as humans, structure ourselves, our ideas, our customs, and our social behaviours.

Think about the biases in how we teach history in the UK - my experience was mostly kings and queens and then world wars 1 and 2, a bit of the falklands war, and that was pretty much it. I understand most people will have (or had) a similar experience.

It’s extremely rare to see much more than a quick mention of the British Empire (good or bad), or the transatlantic slave trade, or how Jesus was not in fact a white man from Oxford but was actually a Jewish man from the Middle East, or for that matter how the bulk of mathematical theory originated in Ancient Egypt, Ancient India, Ancient Greece, and Ancient China. The list could go on- but the point is - we choose what we teach our children (who become the adults in society) and those choices will impact how rounded or biased our society is towards different cultures.

Cultural Relativism

The answer to ethnocentrism is cultural relativism. The principle in anthropology and sociology that a person’s beliefs, values, and practices should be understood based on that person’s own culture, rather than judged by the criteria of another culture.

Cultural relativism emphasises that there is no “universal” standard for right or wrong; rather, each culture’s norms and values are viewed as products of its unique history, environment, and social circumstances.

This is not to say that we should blindly accept someone else’s actions because of their cultural heritage.

For example, I would absolutely insist that Female Genital Mutilation is barbaric and wrong regardless of any cultural or social factors that might lead to FGM.

The point is, when we come to form our opinions/laws we should do so with the full perspective of behaviors and customs in the full cultural context.

Put simply, we can still say something is wrong. But we should not just dismiss something as wrong because it is different.

Practices that may seem unusual or objectionable in one society may hold significant meaning and function in another, and thus should be understood in those terms to gain a balanced perspective.

Celebrating Diversity of Culture

I’d actually go further- when we incorporate other cultures into our own, we can end up with something much better for everyone.

I mentioned the empire earlier, there was an awful lot of bad stuff that happened under the umbrella of “the British Empire”. However a lot of good happen as well.

My existence is down to the post war British Nationality Act 1948 which gave people from colonies the right to live and work in Britain. People in the Caribbean were invited to the UK to help rebuild post-war Britain, which is how it came to be that my father moved from Barbados to England. The Windrush generation experienced hardships and faced prejudices- but they also joined the local populace, made connections, fell in love, and produced children (like me, hurrah!).

Likewise we could consider food - how many fantastic foods are a fusion of cuisines, from flavour combinations and inspirations all the way to dishes entirely invented to cater to different tastes and preferences (looking at you Korma).

Or how about music- where modern music is almost entirely permutations and combinations of influences from music from all around the world.

I could go on - I’m not going to attempt to describe all culture ever. I think the point is that cultural relativism goes both ways, the good and the bad. We should not combat the ethnocentric narrative exclusively with contrarianism. When you live in a society- it’s likely that within that society there will be a certain amount of bias towards the prevailing culture. It’s not a helpful response to blindly attack the dominant culture. If two wrongs don’t make a right then two biases don’t make balance.

Balance comes from destroying ignorance - by learning and celebrating our diversity of cultures and trying to find the best combinations for a given situation.

Cultural relativism in asset management

Obviously cultural differences exist in infrastructure organisations (and in all businesses), both locally to a given organisation as well as when comparing organisations in different countries and regions.

That was going to be the subject of this post but given the length I’ll split that out into its own post.

Thanks!

Thanks for reading! As always, if you enjoyed this, the best compliment you could give me would be to share this with someone else who might enjoy it. If you’d like to be notified of future posts, please do join my mailing list here and I’ll drop you an email. I won’t use your details for any other purpose and I promise not to spam you with content.

Simple. Complex. Simple.

As per my 2024 new years resolutions, I am fortunate to have some awesome professional mentors.

Oli Hawes, Mott MacDonald Digital Ventures Unit General Manager, has been helping me for quite a while now.

Much of my career before joining Mott MacDonald had been in relatively small teams, and working within infrastructure businesses (i.e. within client organisations).

I asked Oli for some help learning how to be successful in a relatively large global consultancy. Oli being an excellent person to ask having done exactly this helping Mott MacDonald build it’s digital offering through Smart Infrastrucutre and Digital Ventures.

A useful conceptual model Oli shared with me is that big strategic work often falls into 3 phases:

At first, the basic concept of what you’re trying to do is usually fairly simple. The idea itself often comes easily.

Then, when you start getting into the work thing’s become complicated. Often things become bewilderingly complex - anything slightly tangential to the subject can be considered. It’s very easy to become lost in the detail. Others, when trying to help can bring more complexity, attaching their ideas to yours.

One of the biggest factors that determine success is the ability to transition from that complexity, back into simplicity.

Why this matters

Considering the longer term, this is about stepping back from the detail and working out what’s really important, and making that the focus.

In the shorter term it can be as simple as prioritising effort to be most effective in a given moment.

The key is to be mindful of the ever expanding complexity in the middle - and to deliberately focus on getting back to a simple overall point for whatever it is that you’re trying to achive.

Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading this, please consider subscribing for occasional updates to when I’ve shared something new. You can also find me on LinkedIn.

2024 New Year’s resolutions - Getting things done through communities

It’s definitely too late to say Happy New Year. However, as is customary in January, I’ve been doing some thinking about New Year’s resolutions.

TL;DR

This year I’m aiming to…

  • Be better at teamwork and get things done through communities,

  • Do more leading and less directing, and

  • Reduce my ego and help others to shine.

Short story long…

The power of communities

My main resolution for this year is to try to get things done through communities rather than being directive and task orientated.

Photo by Shane Rounce

I guess there’s something to be said for realising the limits of our own abilities as individuals. It’s natural to think about our plans from the perspective of the self:

  • “I’m going to do X”

  • “I will achieve Y”

  • “I will finish Z”

Very few things are delivered by one person in isolation – the reality is that to do almost anything, we are dependent on others.

That doesn’t mean to say projects don’t have leaders or that ideas aren’t important. The main point is – given the size of my ambitions – I need the help of others. And that means I need to elevate my leadership approach.

Rather than me do all the things, or me give all the things to others as tasks, I need to work to inspire others around an idea. To achieve my goals, they need to match the goals of others so that we’re all trying to help each other.

Leading not managing.

Direction not directing.

A typical career Arc

Relevant to this is some of what my mentors have been helping me with around my leadership development.

While this has been helpful for me, I do appreciate we’re all individuals and there is no right or wrong career path. That said we could summarise a “typical” career arc into 5 modes. 

At the start of our career, we spent most of our time learning how to do things. As we get more experience we start to do more things, we are better at what we do and can start to do it independently.

Initially this doing is still part of that learning mode, but as we get more confident and experienced we are able to deliver work independently.

As we get more senior and more experienced, we start to manage the doing of work. We take more ownership of our own work and eventually will start to manage the work of others.

I’m currently learning how to be in the next stage of my career around leading. Specifically I’m finding leadership is less about managing tasks, telling people what to do and how to do it. I’m finding that leadership is more about inspiring others around the idea or the outcome that you’re trying to achieve, and then empowering managers to own a plan of how to deliver tasks that align with the delivery of that overall outcome.

The 5th mode of the career is around counselling others. I think the objective at this point is to have built up enough knowledge and wisdom that your counsel, your views and opinions, have value to others around you. In this final mode of the career it seems to be less about getting stuff done. I think it’s more about being a sage advisor sharing experience and thoughts.

A key point here is that these modes are not rigid but overlap entirely. Everyone should be learning. Most people, regardless of how wise they are, still have to get things done. Some of the best learning moments I’ve had have come from the counsel of junior colleagues through their observations and questions.

It seems useful to me to reflect on the balancing of how much of each mode we hold at different times in our career.

My current focus is on trying to be such a good leader that I am able to empower those leaders around me, creating a virtuous feedback loop. The leader matrix!

We all have ego

In psychological terms, it can be understood that we all hold in our minds an internal constructed model for what “good” and “bad” looks like. Our ego is simply a way of describing how we mediate between the conscious and the unconscious and how we test reality against that constructed model.

Photo by Yeshi Kangrang  

While the detail behind that is probably for a different post, I think it is worth making an important caveat that the concept of ego is only a model. This can be useful for exploring who we are and how we relate to others and the world more broadly. However, like all models this is not reality itself but a representation of reality.

Having said that, the premise of the model is that we all have an ego – it’s normal and part of what makes us who we are. What can be useful is acknowledging that:

  1. Our ego can help us – it can fuel our sense of pride in the work that we do, satisfying that constructed model in a way that drives us to do excellent work,

  2. Our ego can get in our way – where we might feel that others are not satisfying that constructed model, driving us to feel that we need to control things in order to correctly satisfy that constructed model.

For me the watch out is letting my ego drive me to obsess over the detail of the deliverables of which I feel ownership - leading to me being directive and controlling. Even worse this can lead to me being personally less productive as I let perfect be the enemy of adequate.

Main thing is just to be mindful of my ego and to be considerate of my actions in the context of what I’m trying to achieve.

Am I helping to achieve the goal or am I just trying to satisfy my ego?

Communities I would like to build and/or contribute to in 2024

(1) My day job

I love working for Mott MacDonald. I am consistently blown away by how hard working and professional my colleagues are. So it’s the perfect environment to work through communities - encouraging others to be at their best as I try to be at my best.

My main focus in my day job this year is going to be around trying to reduce my ego. I want to let brilliant people shine.

While others might solve our challenges differently to how I would - I’m trying to focus more on ‘whether we met the challenge’ rather than ‘whether my “answer” to the challenge was the one we delivered’.

(2) Henry Washington

I’ve been working on a screen play for years now. I think again my ego has been holding me back here. Because I wanted to write it myself, I’d only shared the idea with a few people. Which in hindsight was a bit silly as (1) it’s incredibly unlikely someone is going to “steal” the idea or something and (2) if someone does “steal” the idea I can always point back to this blog post. Ultimately it’s not “my” story - it’s about Henry Washington (I’m writing a more detailed post about this which I will link here when done).

Credit British Library

I always remember Theo Paphitis (on Dragons Den) asking someone -

“Do you want 100% of nothing?”

Better to risk the idea being in the world with the chance of happening than being locked away in my head doing nothing.

The other thing about getting the project out there is hopefully, by having an open mindset working through a “Henry Washington community”, it will be easier for others to join the project rather than “compete” with it.

(3) Centre for asset studies

Last year was incredibly exciting for our think tank. We gained more supporters and contributors and published several articles. And a tremendous highlight was being invited to speak at the Annual Conference of the Institute of Asset Management, sharing some of our case studies and joining Ursula Bryan (CEO of The Institue of Asset Management) at her Inclusive Infrastructure Panel.

However, I’ve also been personally frustrated that I’ve not been able to get as many ideas out of my head and into published content as I would have liked.

Reflecting on this, we have loads of articles that are 90% complete. While I pride myself on being a good “starter finisher” (i.e. I get stuff done) I’m also aware that I have massive ambition, and I’m constantly committing to do more than I personally have capacity to deliver.

Again – reflecting on my ego, I think I have an enormous amount of pride in the work that we are doing with the centre for asset studies. Our mission is to improve the social and economic impact of the built environment – which maps pretty much 1:2:1 to my internal model of “good”. I think this is leading to “Perfect being the enemy of the adequate” where I sometimes struggle to release content because I have excessively high standards.

Applying my resolutions again, the Centre for Asset Studies is another community to build, where I need to empower our supporters and contributors to deliver more. I need to put more trust in the team to get articles over the line and ready for publication. And importantly, I need to accept that it’s okay if things aren’t always perfect. Our publications only need to be good enough to share ideas in an engaging way.

(4) The Institute of Asset Management

My role volunteering as the Communications Director for the UK Chapter of The Institute of Asset Management, is all about building a community. My core purpose is to drive engagement between our membership and our Chapter, and our community and the wider world.

In the first instance, my main focus in this role is to prioritise time to connect with the other UK Chapter Directors. Too many times last year I was late to, or missed, our regular meetings. To be effective in this role it is fundamental that I’m present and connected with the leadership team.

The second goal is to better lean on our membership. This is less about directing volunteers, but again about empowering them. The institute is built by and built for our asset management community, so harnessing that immense talent has got to be the way forward.

Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading this, please consider subscribing for occasional updates to when I’ve shared something new. You can also find me on LinkedIn.

P.S.

If you have any reflecting or thoughts, please do let me know.

To address climate change, political mandates need to get less political

(Quick note - while this is slightly political, I’m trying not to make it about individual politicians or political parties. For the avoidance of doubt, all views are my own).

TLDR

  • Climate change is real, caused by humans, and this is bad.

  • The ULEZ (on balance) is good.

  • Political wrangling is making it harder to form a coherent strategy on the scale required to address climate change.

Short story long…

(views are my own!)

The climate is still changing and it’s still because of human activity

While it’s difficult to point at a specific event as evidence for a trend in something as massively complex as the earth’s climate, the current out of control wildfires do make for a dramatic and very visual representation of global warming.

A firefighter walks next to rising flames as a wildfire burns near the village of Vati, on the island of Rhodes, Greece, July 25, 2023. REUTERS/Nicolas Economou

The scientific consensus strongly supports the idea that human activities, especially the emission of greenhouse gases, are the primary drivers of modern climate change. You don’t need to take that statement at face value - there are heaps of studies and climate models that have all come to the same conclusion:

The IPCC

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is an authoritative international body that assesses scientific research related to climate change. Their assessment reports are based on extensive research conducted by thousands of scientists worldwide. These reports consistently show that human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation, are the primary drivers of global warming and climate change. The latest IPCC reports and supporting information are available on their website.

The CMIP

The CMIP (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) is a collaborative effort among climate modeling centers worldwide to improve and compare climate models. The CMIP models have been used extensively to study climate change and its potential impacts. While CMIP models encompass a range of scenarios, the majority of them demonstrate that human activities significantly influence the observed climate change. The CMIP and their model data is accessible through the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) website.

NASA

NASA's Global Climate Change centre provide comprehensive information on climate change, including the role of human activities. NASA's scientists have contributed significantly to understanding climate change through satellite observations, data analysis, and climate modeling. On their website, you can find various articles, reports, and visualizations that support the conclusion that climate change is largely caused by human activities.

Point being, climate change is real and human made greenhouse gases are the cause.

Was the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election a referendum on the ULEZ?

So in the context of the planet being on fire, we come to the recent Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election results, where it’s been widely reported that the election became a referendum on the expansion of the ultra low emissions zone (ULEZ), which is an environmental policy of the current Elected Mayor of London.

This seems to have raised the idea that pushing back against action to tackle climate change is somehow a vote winner.

The assumption being that if the by-election was a referendum on ULEZ, then ULEZ lost. But did it?

In reality elections are messy and complicated- and while I’m sure some people were swayed by the ULEZ issue - most voters have multiple, often contradictory reasons to vote one way or another. Beware anyone offering single issues: it’s the economy complicated stupid.

Either way, the outcome from the election has been lots of political analysis and questioning about whether the public will vote for environmental initiatives like ULEZ. I’ve heard it positioned as: most people want to stop climate change but most people don’t want to accept any inconveniences to do so.

This is obviously nonsense and pretty insulting to the public.

The majority of people accept that climate change is happening. Most people are capable of understanding the concept. Most (two thirds in recent polling) people agree we need to take more action.

And I really don’t think people are so short sighted that they’re unprepared to be inconvenienced. I think we as a society- and especially our political leaders - have failed to articulate a coherent strategy that people can buy into.

A single consideration like ULEZ can be a hard sell in isolation. But ULEZ in the context of everything else would be palatable.

I’ve written before in support of the ULEZ and while it’s not perfect it is on balance a good initiative.

The ULEZ as part of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy

So in that context, I’d highly recommend reading the Mayors transport strategy.

(Note: I didn’t have anything to do with writing it but have been involved in helping to implement bits of it through my day job.)

I won’t comment on the strategy directly (aforementioned day job). However I don’t think it’s controversial to suggest that because it needs to be a political document as much as an actual practical strategy there some compromises in it that require interpretation.

I mean - That’s baked in. An elected mayor’s transport strategy is going to be linked to the elected mayor’s democratic mandate.

The Political and Strategic context of the ULEZ

The impact of the mayor’s transport strategy being political is that TfL’s funding is also political.

So in that context, we should consider the current settlement between the DfT and TfL, which intends for London to be the biggest city in the world without a public subsidy for its public transport network:

“…TfL will … fund day-to-day operations through our normal revenue sources…”

How TfL is Funded

In my view this is quite a cynical political play by our government- to underfund London’s transport infrastructure, force the Mayor to raise local funding through things like the ULEZ, then attack the Mayor for implementing the ULEZ in the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election. Presumably this will continue in the coming mayoral elections.

I guess the most charitable interpretation would be that the government genuinely feels that there isn’t enough money at a national level to fund regional transport, and that this should be funded by the users locally. If this is the case, it’s a pretty flawed concept. It’s well known that better public transport is better for the environment and better for the local economy encouraging investment and worker mobility. When we make it easier for people to get from where they live to where the jobs are and it’s easier for companies to find workers. Cars are inefficient and low capacity compared to buses and trains.

Let’s be clear, the conspiratorial styled reporting that the ULEZ is about TfL raising funds, is true. TfL have to raise revenue and the ULEZ is a way of generating revenue. There’s actually a pretty strong argument that, if funds have to be raised, then raising them from road vehicles is worth it to subsidise public transport which is more energy efficient, more economically efficient and better for the environment.

Again being clear, if the ULEZ is generating money then that does by design mean less money in the pockets of people. I find it disingenuous when arguments are made that X group won’t be impacted, or that it’s fair because of Y accommodation. Money is changing hands and that will have an economic impact. And while it is quite easy for someone driving a modern ULEZ compliant car  to down play the effort of navigating the system to replace a noncompliant vehicle- it should not be forgotten that the people most likely to be driving a non compliant people are also the least likely to be able to navigate the system. I grinds my gears how quick people can be to judge others we know nothing about. There’s a whole other world that people live within right under our noses. Households of Multiple Occupation: literally multiple whole families living in houses originally built for one. People working multiple minimum wage jobs to put food on the table. These people are the most likely to be effected and most likely to struggle work out what to do about it. I digress…

Another huge problem with the ULEZ charges is that the charges aren’t being fully offset by discounts to more environmentally friendly alternatives.

Needing to be self funded, TfL are now making tough decisions about which services it can afford, and what services need to be reduced, how they can make the limited funding go further and how they can increase revenues.

Inevitably this means that TfL investment in environmental initiatives is going constrained. There are always financial constraints- however it would seem the current constraints on London are significantly harsher than any equivalent sized city in the western world.

Unhelpful Politics

For me, one thing that is very frustrating about all of this is the lack of coordination with national strategy or policy. Climate change is such a big of a threat to humanity, we need an aligned approach from national strategy through to local implementation. We don’t have time to be messing around here.

One of the most consistent arguments made by the engineering community is to separate short term politics from long term transport strategy. Given we’re staring down the barrel of climate change we need meaningful actual policy, objectives, strategies and plans.

The big challenge for London / south east will always be getting political organisations lined up.

An example of misalignment local to where I live

Consider the (now indefinitely postponed) metropolitan line Watford extension, which for a relatively modest investment would have significantly improved connectivity (more people closer to public transport options) and functional resilience (alternative journeys in case of closure of one of the lines). It would objectively be the best thing for the people of Watford and for the people of London.

Despite it mostly being funded by the public, the flow of money got mashed up within different authorities (National, County, Borough, London) who couldn’t get aligned on who should fund what and by how much.

The three main UK political parties were represented and when the project collapsed they all blamed each other.

It is easy to blame individual politicians for failing to prioritise the scheme - however each authority’s internal incentives ultimately caused them to make the decisions they did. The answer is to provide unifying incentives external to each authority, but aligned to a common strategy. Again - we need a coherent strategy to respond to climate change. We need leadership and vision.

One of the central ideas we’ve been pushing at The Centre for Asset Studies has been about alignment. One of our first papers we published discussed a proposed plan for northern infrastructure investment to create a single urban centre with sufficient economic gravity to rebalance the UK economy.

While that proposal is an interesting line of thought, a plan that grand would depend on a lot of people getting behind it. Big improvements are possible: there are countless feats of engineering that demonstrate this is the case. But for any of that to happen we need clear leadership and vision.

Thanks for reading

Appreciate this post was a bit longer than usual, and skated around some political issues.

If you enjoyed reading this one (or didn’t), please let me know. Always keen for feedback!

And as ever, if you did enjoy it, the best compliment you could give me would be to share it with someone who you think would like it!
Lastly - if you haven’t already subscribed, please do so here to get occasional updates on posts or publications.

Computer Models for Asset Intensive Businesses

In a recent blog post I mentioned I would write a post about what computer science aspects would mean for Enterprise Asset Management.

By coincidence, I recently proposed a framework to describe the different types of computer models that can be used by businesses, especially from an Asset Management perspective.

So as well as meeting that promise, I’m also keen on getting feedback from the wider asset management and infrastructure management community on this framework – if you have any thoughts, please do get in touch via LinkedIn here or through this blog here .

TL;DR

  • Data models - hold and serve data

  • Information models - put data into context

  • Optimisation models - find solutions to problems

  • Generative models - make up data from existing data

Short story long

All businesses use models. The computer revolution means that Microsoft applications like Excel or Power BI are ubiquitous. Finance use models to help with things like management accounts or tax liabilities. HR use models to understand things like absence or performance. And Asset Managers use models to understand things like which asset interventions are required and when.

The following framework attempts to differentiate between these models in terms of their complexity or “evolution”. This is important, as understanding the form of output that each type of model can achieve, can help frame what kind of model might be needed for a specific business requirement.

The framework is summarised in the following diagram. Below that, I’ve tried to add further context and detail.

Data Model

As discussed, all asset owners have some level of data models. Data models are about understanding available data, and while this isn’t always as sophisticated as the headline grabbing capabilities of a generative model like ChatGPT, data models are really important to the functioning of any organisation or business (or society in general).

A slightly more formal definition of a data model would be “a conceptual representation of data and how it is organized and structured within a database or information system.”

Data models can be represented using various notations, including Entity-Relationship Diagrams (ERDs), UML (Unified Modelling Language) diagrams, and textual descriptions. Populating and using these notations is a bit of a specialism!

Point being, a data model defines the way data is stored, accessed, and manipulated, so that the data can be interrogated.

Information Model

Information models are about putting data into context to create meaningful insights.

A more formal definition on an information model would “be a conceptual framework that defines the structure, organization, and semantics of information within a particular domain or context.”

Information models serve as a bridge between the abstract representation of data and the technical implementation in databases or information systems.

Generally, information models are built from existing data models. It’s typical for organisations to have some information models, however the extent of connectivity between those models to create the context is usually where the challenge exists.

An important difference between a data model and information model, is that an information model provides a high-level representation of data and how it is related, without getting into the specific technical details of how data is stored or processed.

A key attribute of an information model is the relationships that define how entities (the specific data) are connected or related to each other. These connections show how information flows or interacts within the model. Relationships can be one-to-one, one-to-many, or many-to-many, depending on the nature of the connections.

Another key attribute is the information model semantics, which describe the meaning of the data to help understand the significance of data elements and their relationships.

Optimisation Model

This is about making more connections between datasets and insights than could be done manually and using heuristic models as an equivalent of modelling every possible scenario to find the best choice.

A more formal definition of an optimisation model is “a mathematical or computational representation of a problem designed to find the best solution among a set of possible solutions.”

The models are used to systematically analyse, evaluate, and make decisions regarding various factors or variables while aiming to maximise or minimise a specific objective or set of objectives, often referred to as the objective function.

The objective function quantifies the goal that needs to be optimised and defines the logical relationship between the decision variables and the objective. For example, this could be “to minimise cost of asset interventions”.

Something that can sometime cause confusion, is that we often talk about minimising objective functions as minimising the “cost”. This isn’t a financial cost but is a way of describing the value of an objective function, where we might use penalties for outcomes we don’t want and rewards for outcomes we do want. If that didn’t make sense (I’ve witnessed many confused conversations between computer scientists, engineers, and accountants over the years) don’t worry – the point is just that with an optimisation model ‘minimising cost’ probably isn’t talking about money.

Another attribute of optimisation models worth discussing is decision variables: These are the specific data that can be controlled or adjusted to influence the outcome of the problem being optimised. Decision variables represent the choices or decisions that need to be made. For example, in Asset Management Whole Life Cost Optimisation, these variables would be things like volume of maintenance vs volume of renewals.

The last attribute to discuss (although there are many more) would be constraints. Constraints are mathematical expressions that limit the values of the decision variables (and therefore constrain the optimisation model. A good way to think about this, would be optimising a railway passengers’ journey. The optimum journey would cost £0, would have zero safety issues, and would take zero seconds. Obviously, this is impossible – the constraints are what make the solutions considered possible solutions. While input data is intuitively required for any model, it is especially important for any optimisation to have enough data to constrain the model to reality (or at least close enough to reality to be useful).

At the core of any optimisation model, is the Optimisation Algorithm(s). To find the optimal solution, the model will rely on one (or usually many) computational algorithms. There are many, and people are coming up with new ideas and ways of optimising all the time:

  1. Enumeration: For simple problems you can just calculate every possible solution. The first question should always be – do I actually need to optimise or can I make the problem small enough to enumerate!

  2. Random Search: An optimisation method that explores the solution space by randomly sampling points, often used when the search space is poorly understood. Quite good for an initial exploration for theoretical or intangible problems.

  3. Gradient Descent: An iterative algorithm used to find the minimum of a function by adjusting model parameters in the direction of steepest descent of the gradient. Can be quite fast, but in my (admittedly out of date) experience can get stuck in local optima (rather than finding the global optimum)

  4. Hill Climbing: A simple optimisation algorithm that iteratively makes small modifications to a solution to find an optimal or locally optimal solution. While this is generally a poor way to find the global optimum this can be quite useful for optimising from known scenarios towards a local optimum. For example, in asset management it’s typical to manually produce a small set of future asset management intervention scenarios – something like (1) following manufacturers recommendations, (2) early renewal, (3) high maintenance, (4) low maintenance. A Hill Climbing algorithm could offer slightly improved scenarios from those “base” scenarios that are likely to be fairly sensible.

  5. Genetic Algorithms: (this was my jam at uni) A search heuristic inspired by the process of natural selection, where populations of potential solutions evolve over generations to find optimal or near-optimal solutions. The really cool thing about this, is the cross over and mutation aspect means that you can find solutions from across the whole solution space.

  6. Differential Evolution: An evolutionary algorithm that uses the difference between candidate solutions to create new ones in the search for optimal solutions.

  7. Simulated Annealing: A probabilistic optimisation technique inspired by the annealing process in metallurgy, used to find the global minimum of a function by accepting occasional uphill moves with decreasing probability.

  8. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO): An algorithm that simulates the social behaviour of birds or fish, where particles in the search space move towards the best-known solutions.

  9. Ant Colony Optimization (ACO): An optimization algorithm inspired by the foraging behaviour of ants, where artificial ants explore a solution space and leave pheromone trails to find the optimal path.

  10. Tabu Search: An iterative optimization algorithm that maintains a short-term memory of visited solutions and uses taboo lists to avoid revisiting previously explored areas.

  11. Linear Programming: A mathematical technique for finding the optimal solution to a linear objective function subject to linear inequality constraints (limited use as a primary optimiser, but quite helpful within a model, especially for a discrete or variable set within a model – for example this could be used to optimise a specific node within an artificial neural network).

  12. Integer Programming: Similar to linear programming, but it deals with discrete decision variables rather than continuous ones, often used in combinatorial optimisation problems (can be quite coarse but very useful to speed up working through known sections of the solution space where you don’t want to waste computational effort).

  13. Quadratic Programming: A mathematical optimisation technique for solving problems with quadratic objective functions and linear constraints (quite a nice solution where there are harmonics within the dataset, although you generally would need lots of experience with the problem and using optimisation to know the timing to apply this).

  14. Dynamic Programming: An optimisation approach that breaks down a complex problem into smaller subproblems and solves them recursively, often used in sequential decision-making problems.

Ultimately, optimisation models provide a systematic and quantitative approach to decision-making by identifying the best course of action given a set of constraints and objectives. There are certainly specific areas where optimisation is being applied (for example pipe network optimisation, railway track rail wear models). The main limitation to date has been having adequate volume of data of sufficient quality to train the models.

Generative Model

Generative models repeatedly model scenarios to train an “artificial intelligence” that uses learned patterns and connections to generate new data or content to form part of the insights provided. The point here is that they have a form of intelligence in that they’re generating new data that is similar to, and often indistinguishable from the data that they have been trained on.

It’s worth noting that these models have gained significant attention in recent years due to their ability to create realistic and creative content, such as text, images, music, and more. That said the whole “intelligence” aspect is a bit thin – there is no free will and - as of yet - no models are able to escape the paradigm of their training data. Basically, new material isn’t created it is generated. There’s a philosophical point about perceived creativity: If I think, therefore I am, then if I think that you think, are you? I digress…

Generative AI models are typically based on deep learning techniques: that is, artificial neural networks with huge amounts of training data). I think that’s why we like to think of them as intelligent, because the core learning network is similar to a biological function.

However, there is so much to talk about here, I might do another post on how artificial intelligence works and how it is applied in engineering systems.

Something that is worth mentioning is the ethical and legal aspects:

Firstly, training these models requires available data and ownership of that data is quite interesting. The actual models are like black boxes, where they’re so complex (and often constantly updating themselves) we can only ever take a snapshot in time of what the algorithm is doing, and even then they’re built from pure logical functions without semantic meaning. If I walk around an art gallery, get inspired and create some art – did I take something from the original artists? Or more to the point, did I take something that someone owned?

The second big aspect is that the training data comes from an imperfect world and so is inherently biased by it’s training set. I was going to go into lots of detail, but this post is already quite long. Main point here is that there have already been examples of models reinforcing racial and gender bias’s (which catch headlines) but those bias’s will also effect other things. For example, imagine building a whole life cost model using a training data set from organisation A, that training data will include the historic organisational attitudes to risk of organisation A. When applied to organisation B, that bias could lead to outputs outside of organisation B’s risk tollerance.

Anyways - the point here, is not to dwell on the challenges related to the ethics of generative models, but to acknowledge that we need to face into the risks as well as the exciting opportunities.

Reflecting on how models have been applied within infrastructure asset management, these applications have largely been held back by the lack of available training data. What’s really interesting is the opportunity to use generative models to make up for this shortfall in data (as would be required for a standard optimisation model) and instead use massive volumes of data from multiple sources (like the open internet and the closed intranets of companies) to build intelligence that could help to translate poor quality and incomplete data into useful data for future modelling.

Future Models!

That last point touches on specific project I’m part of. Building on some strategies we’ve developed for applied modelling for asset management use cases, I’m looking to run some pilots with real world data. So please do get in touch if this is of interest!

Additional Notes

Models are Models

Something always worth repeating is that a model really is a just model. It’s limited by assumptions and simplifications – without getting too philosophical, it’s not actually possible to truly replicate the thing being modelled – even if we completely duplicated the thing being modelled, the foundational elements will always be different. Taken to extremis this can transition from mathematics (logic) to physics (quantum building blocks).

Optimisation is a defined term.

Another side rant, and I know it’s probably not normal, but I do get quite wound up about people using the word “optimisation” incorrectly. Comparing a couple of scenarios is ranked selection: “Out of these 5 scenarios which one is better”. Optimisation is estimating every possible solution, to understand not better, but the best. One way of doing this is enumeration (calculating every possible scenario) but even simple problems can have a massive number of solutions beyond human (or computational) ability to calculate. This is where heuristics comes in – trying to demonstrate you’ve done the equivalent of an enumeration calculation but by reducing the number of calculations to something achievable.

P.S.

If you liked this article, the best compliment you could give me would be to share it with someone who you think would like it!

Communications Director for The UK Chapter of the Institute of Asset Management

I’m very excited to have joined the board of the UK Chapter of the Institute of Asset Management as Communications Director. This is a big role that I intend to take seriously.

Here are 3 things I want to achieve:

(1) To Connect

What is life if it isn’t the connections that we make - interactions that enrich our shared human experience. TheIAM is all about helping industry professionals to connect, share and learn from each other. As we come together to explore concepts and mash ideas together, we each improve our own understanding and often create new configurations of ideas or new ideas entirely.

Smart people make each other smarter.

(2) Make a positive impact

I’m a massive geek when it comes to asset management. I love it. I want to share that passion - helping to build a structured approach to our communications and marketing. This will help connect our membership to the chapter, to each other, as well as promoting best practice.

Now is the right time.

(3) Learn and grow

I also hope that this role will give me opportunities to learn, enrich my own experience, and better understand myself. Specifically - I’m keen to build my confidence presenting and get better at using technology to improve my productivity.

Be comfortable being uncomfortable.

Next steps

I’ve agreed an initial plan with the rest of the board. The first tasks are (1) get set up with all the existing tools and accounts. (2) getting into a regular rhythm of email updates to our membership. (3) getting coordinated with our colleagues who look after Assets Magazine.

Thank you!

There wouldn’t be anything to communicate if it wasn’t for the huge amount of hard work by the many thousands of asset management professionals in our community, our membership, and the institute's staff and volunteers.

And on a personal note, a massive thank you to Stewart Whyte, the UK Chapter Chairperson, and also to the rest of the board, for giving me this opportunity to contribute to the Asset Management Community.

P.S.

It’s a ridiculously exciting time at the Institute. More structure, more members, more events, more connections. If you want to know how you can get involved in the continuing professionalisation of the asset management industry, drop me a message.

The problem(s) with Enterprise Asset Management Software

Enterprise Asset Management Software (software that helps an enterprise manage its assets) is notoriously a bit rubbish.

 For most Enterprise Asset Management Software, the user interface is unlikely to be clear or intuitive, with a need for formal training for anyone who wants to use it.

This is particularly apparent in an age where we walk around with powerful mobile phones in our pockets, with slick user interfaces having had the benefit of 10s of billions of dollars in development effort, and that give access to the near unlimited power of cloud computing.

So what is going on with Enterprise Asset Management Software?

I think* there are a bunch of major challenges with Enterprise Asset Management Software. There are also some solutions to these challenges. (Basically, expect many more posts on this subject).

Limited user base and limited development budget

The addressable market for the iPhone is pretty massive. Approximately 150 million iPhones are sold each year. That’s a lot of users! Given how important the user experience is for a premium smart phone to remain competitive in the market, it’s not surprising that Apple spend 10s of billions of dollars each year on development, all in service of their slogan “it just works”. The whole business is set up to make everything about having an Apple product intuitive, user friendly, stable and generally quite good. Fundamentally, this level of investment is justified by the size of the returns driven by the number of customers willing to pay for that experience.

“It just works”

Contrast this with how a typical infrastructure manager will use Enterprise Asset Management Software. The technology budget will likely be a in the order of millions of pounds, with at most hundreds of users. The software updates will likely be limited to cybersecurity or simply keeping up with server patching. Within an individual Infrastructure Manager there simply is not the money available, or the business case justification, to invest in technology infrastructure to anything beyond the clunky, functional, and the minimum viable. Even pooling together all businesses and organisations that need to look after infrastructure assets you don’t really get anywhere near the funding levels to come close to a slick user experience.

Big Tech to the rescue?

It’s tempting to assume all the giant tech giants (apple, google, Microsoft etc) will pile into this underserved market, challenging the status quo by massively investing into disrupting alternative solutions, undercutting the existing software solutions with a superior product with the long term aim of capturing the markets and returning all that tech speculative investment.

In reality, when compared to the size of consumer technology markets, that long term aim is just not attractive enough for the bigger tech giants to pay significant attention to infrastructure managers.

What the big tech giants will do, is to offer platforms with commodified applications that can be created by much smaller developers or directly by clients themselves. This is exactly what’s happening with Microsoft Power BI. Microsoft aren’t solving for infrastructure managers, they’re solving for anyone who wants to put data into context and display information, which is a pretty broad user base! The same way that most businesses adopted Microsoft word as a software application that sits on windows, most businesses will adopt PowerBI as an application through Microsoft 365.

What does this mean?

In the immediate term I expect the space will continue to be dominated by subsidiaries/subdivisions of general corporate software providers like IBM has IBM Maximo. For most operational Infrastructure Managers, the risk and cost of changing Enterprise Asset Management Software is unlikely to be worth it for the potential benefits in the current market. And for most big tech companies Enterprise Asset Management Software does not present a big enough market to be interesting to disrupt.

 That said, Infrastructure Managers will continue to adopt commodified applications (like Power BI) that sit on the big tech platforms. As commodified applications become more widespread, we might see diminishing value in the big Enterprise Asset Management Software solutions.

We will also continue to see the rise of smaller specialist technology companies (so called “small tech”) who link commodified applications into new configurations to create new software packages, often branded with their own front end user interface.

It is an open question whether any of these “small tech” solutions are sustainable based on software alone. The whole risk with delivering a commodified service is really high competition. The platform massively reduces barrier to entry: That puts huge commercial pressure on small tech companies reliant on platforms (someone else could do your work but cheaper or better), and it means there’s a constant risk of Infrastructure Managers in-housing that capability.

 The flip side to this, and the really exciting thing about the rise of commodified applications, is that the competition should lead to better outcomes. Where the traditional Enterprise Asset Management Software companies had very little incentive to do better, they’re at serious risk of disruption by these small tech solutions.

So what’s the answer, to the problem(s) with Enterprise Asset Management Software?

In the short term…

Existing Enterprise Asset Management Software are likely to be around for a good while yet, complete with all the challenges discussed above (and more!). So, the answer is trying to use them as competently as possible. I’m quite obviously biased, but I do think consultants like me can offer a lot of value to Infrastructure Managers by:

  1. Helping to define information requirements and select the best Enterprise Asset Management Software to meet those requirements

  2. Helping to map how data flows (or should flow) through organisations so that the data can be put into context to create information that supports the functioning of the infrastructure manager

  3. The practical delivery of Enterprise Asset Management Software – both project management as well as the design, configuration, and tailoring of the software.

  4. Understanding Use Cases, required competencies, then building and rolling out training that supports the identified users.

  5. Helping to combine Enterprise Asset Management Software with other systems (like those commodified applications), to support the functioning of the infrastructure manager

  6. Being able to map and explain how the Enterprise Asset Management Software (and other software solutions and applications) on which the Infrastructure Manager is dependant, both to help provide assurance that it’s all working as it should within the Infrastructure Managers Management System, but also to identify opportunities for efficiencies and improvements, or to flag risks or concerns to be mitigated.

In the medium term…

The “small tech” solutions will continue to challenge the status quo. This will lead to better outcomes for infrastructure managers as packaged solutions get better and better, and this will also pressure incumbent Enterprise Asset Management Software providers to get better. We should ALL be happy about this, given that we all rely on the Infrastructure Managed by Infrastructure Managers! Better Enterprise Asset Management Software will support better Asset Management. And better Asset Management leads to reduced cost, increased performance, and reduced risk. That’s things like less expensive trains (or less subsidy from taxpayers). Less raw sewage being dumped into rivers. Less risk of power cuts. Fewer Potholes. And on and on….

 The most successful small tech companies will be those who can leverage their unfair advantage in the market. For example:

  • Where they can apply domain understanding to build better software solutions, able to put themselves in their client’s shoes.

  • Where they can partner and co-create solutions with Infrastructure Managers, where investment is returned through onward sales of the solution.

  • Where use of all available asset data can be used to inform the development of the system (rather than the system constraining the asset data).

  • Where asset data can be used across multiple applications, with information like asset reliability being shared between Infrastructure Managers.

  • Where they have the competency to be able to understand the extreme complexity around all the various software solutions at all the various levels that exist, and still make this simple enough to be comprehensible and actionable.

There’s more!

I haven’t even scratched the surface with this, so I guess more articles coming soon!

In terms of challenges with Enterprise Asset Management Software we could talk about

  • cybersecurity considerations – and how cloud / platform based solutions aren’t viable for some clients

  • the need to support significant safety and reliability standards,

  • there’s the matter of competence and reliance on domain knowledge,

  • and there’s a lot more to explore on the fundamental market dynamics (and limitations).

Another area I haven’t yet touched on yet (but is really exciting) is the computer science aspects and what they would mean for Enterprise Asset Management Software. Things like Generative Artificial Intelligence, Heuristic Optimisation, Cycle Generative Adversarial Networks, Graph-Structured Data Modelling.

I’m sure I’ve missed lots more - please do get in touch to let me know!

If you want to know when/if I blog about any of that, please subscribe!

*As always, views are my own :)

P.S.

If you liked this article, the best compliment you could give me would be to share it with someone who you think would like it!

Rob Blackie for London

I’m backing Rob Blackie for London.

I could tell you about his decades of campaigning for the Liberal Democrat’s, volunteering in every borough in London.

That’s a solid reason to vote for Rob for London.

I could tell you about his years of experience fighting fake news, campaigning against brexit and standing up for the rights of Europeans living in London. 

Also a good reason to vote for Rob.

We could talk about his award winning campaign to bring the people of Russia the truth about the war in Ukraine, using his expertise in media and technology to smash through the Russian censors and Putin’s twisted propaganda. 

An extremely good reason to vote for Rob.

There are so many, really good reasons to vote for Rob. But I want to tell you why I’m supporting Rob - personally.

Put simply, Rob supported me during a challenging time in my life. I didn’t have steady work, and I’d taken the plunge to go all in and launch the ethical tech company I’d been working on.

I’d saved for years to be able to do it - but those savings were fast running out and it didn’t feel like I was progressing at all.

When I reached out, Rob was happy to help. Not only did he provide practical guidance but he also gave me the encouragement to make some difficult decisions I needed to make.

He helped me focus in on what I was doing, and why I was doing it.

Rob didn’t ask for anything in return. He was just helping because he saw someone in need of help, and he had the tools to make a positive impact.

And that’s the kind of guy Rob is. Rob cares about helping people and making a positive impact. Rob is reliable and dependable. Rob demonstrates exactly the kind of leadership we need in London.

I really encourage you to consider supporting Rob for London.

You can find out more at his website: rob4london.com

Hope in the face of climate change

Climate change is one of the biggest challenges facing humanity. Yet, I recently saw some information published by Our World in Data which made me more hopeful about our ability to adapt to the changing climate.

Why do we need to adapt?

Climate change is having a significant impact on the frequency and intensity of natural disasters around the world.

The effects of climate change, such as rising temperatures, sea level rise, and increased precipitation, are leading to more frequent and severe natural disasters, such as floods, droughts, and hurricanes.

The frequency and intensity of extreme weather events is projected to increase as the planet continues to warm [1].

Warmer temperatures can lead to more intense heatwaves and droughts, which can lead to increased risk of wildfires.

Sea level rises caused by the melting of ice sheets and glaciers can lead to more severe coastal flooding during storm surges.

Warmer oceans can lead to more intense hurricanes, as the warmer water provides more energy for these storms to develop.

All of these natural hazards impact the built environment, our homes, our work, how we travel, and pretty much every aspect of our lives.

The climate is changing and we need to adapt.

Man made climate problems

Human activities are responsible for the majority of warming since the mid-20th century [2]. The burning of carbon intense fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, which trap heat and cause the planet to warm.

This warming is causing the climate to change, leading to the increased frequency and intensity of natural disasters.

To be human is to adapt

The story of human civilisation is one of humans adapting their environment.

Humans built shelters to protect themselves from the elements, developed agriculture to tame vegetation to produce food, and created systems for transportation and communication.

Throughout history, human civilization has grown and changed as people have adapted their environment to suit their needs. We have transformed the natural environment to create cities and towns, built infrastructure such as roads and bridges, and developed systems for governance and social organization.

All these changes to the built environment around us allowed for the growth of human population and the development of complex societies that have shaped the world we know today.

And so it follows that we would adapt our civil infrastructure and the built environment to cope with the increasing natural disasters caused by climate change.

We’ve been building stronger and more resilient structures, such as buildings, bridges, and infrastructure that can withstand extreme weather events and rising sea levels. We use more durable building materials, such as steel and reinforced concrete, as well as building codes and regulations that require structures to meet certain standards for strength and resilience.

We’ve created green spaces and natural areas, such as wetlands and forests, that can absorb and slow down water during heavy rainfall and storms, reducing the risk of flooding. This green infrastructure, includes everything from massive constructed wetlands, down to local sustainable urban drainage systems (I’m a big fan of SUDS) like making our driveways from permeable materials.

Local and regional governments have created early warning systems and emergency response plans to help communities prepare for and respond to natural disasters. This may include things like weather monitoring and forecast systems, evacuation plans, and emergency shelters.

In coastal areas, seawalls, dikes, and other coastal defenses have been constructed to protect against sea level rise and storm surges. These structures can be built to be higher, stronger and more resilient to withstand the increasing intensity of storms and waves.

Adaption successful!

And so the data would suggest that humanity is successfully adapting to cope with natural disasters caused by climate change. Despite the global population increasing from 1.6 Bn in 1900 to 7.8 Bn in 2020, and despite the continuing worsening of our climate, it would seem that we are better able than ever to cope with the impacts of natural disasters with far fewer deaths due to natural disasters. [5].

Climate problems require climate solutions

Just because we are adapting, it doesn’t meant we shouldn’t try to limit or reverse human impact on the climate.

As the climate changes, natural hazards will become ever more extreme. This will require more resource intensive mitigations that will be more expensive. If allowed to continue, the changing climate will overwhelm our ability to adapt. The poorest nations will feel this effect first but eventually all of humanity will be impacted.

In the first instance it is absolutely essential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to cleaner sources of energy.

References:

  1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), https://www.ipcc.ch/

  2. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), https://unfccc.int/

  3. "Climate change, natural disasters, and adaptation" by the Environmental Defense Fund https://www.edf.org/climate/climate-change-natural-disasters-and-adaptation

  4. "Climate change and extreme weather events" by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-extreme-weather

  5. “Decadal average death rates (world) from 1900 to 2020” Our World in Data https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/decadal-average-death-rates-from-natural-disasters?country=~OWID_WRL

  6. Urban Drainage, Second Edition, David Butler and John W. Davies (2004)

The formation of the Liberal Democrats (short story long)

The history of UK liberalism can be traced back to the 19th century, when the Liberal Party was formed as a merger of several smaller liberal groups. The party was led by figures such as William Gladstone and David Lloyd George, and it was a major force in British politics for much of the 20th century.

UK liberal successes

The Liberal Party accomplished a number of major achievements in terms of social and economic reform, many of which are the foundations of what we consider modern western societies.

The Liberal Party played a major role in passing the Education Act of 1902. This act was aimed at providing free and compulsory education for children between the ages of 5 and 14 and was seen as a major step towards improving access to education for working-class citizens.

The Liberal Party also passed the National Efficiency Act of 1906. This act was aimed at increasing the efficiency of government departments and was a major step towards modernizing the British state.

In addition, the Liberal government passed the Trade Disputes Act of 1906, which ensured that trade unions were recognized as legal entities and their rights were protected. This act was a major achievement in terms of workers' rights, and it was a significant step towards improving the rights of workers in the UK.

Another major accomplishment of the Liberal Party was the passage of the People's Budget of 1909. This budget was the first of its kind in British history, as it imposed a "super tax" on the wealthy and increased social spending on programs such as housing, education and old-age pensions. This budget was a significant step towards a more equal distribution of wealth and was a major achievement in terms of social reform.

The people’s budget, was bitterly opposed by conservative-unionists in the House of Lords, many of whom were land owners and would have been subject to new land sales taxes in the people budget. This constitutional stand-off was resolved with the Parliament act of 1911 reshaping the relationship between the House of Commons and House of Lords. This essentially removed the ability of the Lords to veto legislation, and massively increased parliament’s accountability to the people with a more representative system.

One of the major accomplishments of the Liberal Party was the passage of the National Insurance Act of 1911. This act provided basic health and unemployment insurance for working-class citizens and was a significant step towards the creation of a welfare state in the UK.

Decline of the Liberal Party

The First World War created massive political instability within the government of the time. Many books have been written on this complex period of time. To briefly summarise, immediately after the armistice of 11th November 1918, ending the First World War, the governing coalition called a general election. Specific candidates were endorsed by the coalition which was highly popular following the war victory, leading to a massive landslide in favour of the coalition government of David Lloyd George, who had replaced H. H. Asquith as Prime Minister in December 1916.

Despite them both being Liberals, they battled for control of the party, which was rapidly losing popular support, while the conservatives gained credibility in office and the labour party started rising as a 3rd party, going on to win national elections starting the two party system we see so entrenched today.

The Liberal Party never managed to resolve its internal struggles and in the context of the changing political landscape of the country, it was in decline by the 1970s.

The Conservative Party, under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher, was able to tap into the growing discontent with the Labour Party's policies of nationalisation and state control of the economy. The Conservative Party's focus on economic liberalism and free market policies was seen as a more viable alternative to the Liberal Party's more interventionist approach.

The Liberal Party failed to adapt to the changing demographic and social landscape of the country. The party was seen as being out of touch with the changing values and priorities of the electorate, particularly on issues such as race and immigration. The party was seen as being too closely associated with the old-fashioned values and traditions of the past, which were no longer resonating with the electorate.

Additionally, the party’s internal divisions caused growing rifts between its members on multiple fronts. Towards the end of the 1970s this rift was dominated by those who were pro-European Union and those who were against closer relations with Europe, this led to the party losing support from both sides of the spectrum. It also struggled to form a clear and consistent narrative and message, which made it difficult for the party to connect with the electorate.

Wait, did somebody say racism just now?

While we should always be careful of judging people in history in the context of our present day values, it’s regretfully the case that there were policies and attitudes within the early UK Liberal Party that were racist, particularly in regards to attitudes towards non-white immigrants.

It’s worth making the point - the Liberal Party that led the UK through the age of the First World War was leading a colonial empire, which by its nature oppressed its subjects for the benefit of its economic elites.

The government (which was Liberal) had a record of racist policies and attitudes towards non-white populations in the colonies. For example, during the early 20th century, the party supported the forced relocation of indigenous people in British colonies such as Australia and Canada, which resulted in the displacement and suffering of those communities.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Liberal Party often advocated for restrictive immigration policies and had a "strongly racist" attitude towards non-white immigrants, particularly those from Asia and Africa.

In the period leading up to the First World War, lots of members of the Liberal Party had views on the issue of eugenics, which was a belief in the genetic superiority of certain races.

It is worth noting that these views and policies were not unique to the Liberal Party, but were prevalent in many other political parties and in society as a whole.

It's important to note too that the liberal party, like any political group, has undergone transformations over time (the whole point of this blog post in fact) and these racist views and policies are no longer held by the current Liberal Democrats. The party has since apologized and recognized the negative impact of the racist policies and views of the past, and today it actively campaigns for inclusion and equal rights for all individuals.

However, it is also important to recognize the negative impact that those views and policies did have on marginalized communities.

Liberalism for me, but not for thee.

Gang of 4 enters the chat

So, by the 1970s, the Liberal Party had declined in popularity, and it was clear that something needed to be done to revitalize the party.

In 1981, a group of prominent figures within the Labour Party known as the Gang of Four broke away from the party to form the Social Democratic Party (SDP). This group was led by Roy Jenkins, Shirley Williams, David Owen, and Bill Rodgers, as they were frustrated by the growing left-wing influence within the Labour Party.

They believed that the Labour Party had become too ideological and too focused on class-based politics, and they wanted to create a new political party that would be more focused on social democracy and economic liberalism.

The formation of the SDP marked a major turning point for the Liberal Party, as it provided an opportunity for the party to merge with a new and dynamic political force.

In 1981, the Liberal Party and the SDP created a formal Alliance to contest the 1983 and 1987 general elections (and local elections around this time). In 1988 the two parties formally merged to form the Social and Liberal Democrats which soon rebranded to The Liberal Democrats.

The Alliance and then merger brought together the liberal and social democratic ideologies of the two parties, and it was seen as a way to create a new and more viable political force that could challenge the dominance of the Conservative Party and the Labour Party.

The coming together of the Liberal Party and the SDP was not without its challenges, however. There were some disagreements between the two parties over issues such as the role of the state in the economy, and there were also some concerns about the leadership of the new party.

Nevertheless, the alliance and then merger were seen as a necessary steps in order to revive the fortunes of the Liberal Party, and it was generally viewed as a success.

The Alliance was able to make significant gains in the 1983 general election, and they were able to secure a number of seats in parliament. This was a significant achievement, and an obvious sign that the coming together had been successful.

The party continued to grow in popularity throughout the late 1980s and 1990s. While it’s fair to say the Liberal Democrat’s have struggled to break out from being a 3rd party, they are undeniably a major force in British politics.

The Current Liberal Democrats

The Liberal Democrats continue to be a significant party, with a large membership and lots of local support. Although they are proportionally underrepresented within parliament (in part due to first past the post) they have huge influence in both policy development and within local politics with large numbers of local authorities run by Liberal Democrat administrations.

The core values of the Liberal Democrats (Liberty, Equality, Community) are explored in the constitution:

The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.

The full constitution can be found here: https://www.libdems.org.uk/constitution

References and further reading

  • Rose, E. (2012). The Emergence of the British Two-Party System, 1867-1914. Routledge.

  • Sykes, R. (2008). The Rise and Fall of the British Empire. I.B.Tauris.

  • Middlemas, K. (1969). The liberal government 1909-1915. London: Longman.

  • Stokes, R. (1969). The people’s budget: 1909–1910. London: Hambledon Press.

  • Lewis, J. (1978). The Voluntary Principle: Philanthropy in the United Kingdom since the Second World War. London: George Allen & Unwin.

  • Baker, D. (2015). The Conservative Party and racism. Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Rose, E. (2012). The Emergence of the British Two-Party System, 1867-1914. Routledge.

  • Sigsworth, E. (2019). Immigration control and the liberal state: the politics of non-citizenship in Britain, c. 1885-1940. Bloomsbury Publishing.

  • Sykes, R. (2008). The Rise and Fall of the British Empire. I.B.Tauris.

The Future is Slow: How Low Speed Rail could revolutionise UK rail capacity

I recently co-authored a paper at the Centre for Asset Studies where we argue for investment in low speed rail. The full paper can be found at the think tank’s website here.

But long story short…

  1. Rail is environmentally friendly and efficient, which is good.

  2. UK passenger rail faces capacity constraints, which is bad.

  3. Investment in new low speed freight routes would be better than investment in new high speed passenger routes

Reflecting on my time as a Political Party Diversity and Inclusion Officer

I recently left my position as the Diversity and Inclusion Officer for a local political party where I live. I had a lot of fun, met some amazing people, and learnt lots about diversity, inclusion, and local politics. 

I was also able to create a positive impact in the party and my local community. Now it feels like a good time for me to move on to new challenges, and for someone with fresh ideas, fresh thinking and fresh energy to move things forward.

I will still remain an activist in the party, and I am really excited about the party’s future.

Three things I learnt from the role:

TL;DR (1) People are different. (2) Diversity and Inclusion pledges are good. (3) People should get involved in local politics. 

Short story long…

(1) We all have certain privileges and certain disadvantages in life.

It is useful to put conscious effort into empathising with others to try to understand their experience, and to understand how those experiences can shape who they are, and how they present themselves. Notably:

  • The most outwardly happy people might be feeling low.

  • Those projecting confidence might feel insecure.

  • The dour can be friendly and witty.

  • People who are quiet are often passionate about their beliefs.

The point being - different people are different (obviously). It is foolish to behave as if people are the same. 

One practical consideration from this, is that the things that make some people feel safe and comfortable, will not work for others. If we design workshops, meetings, socials, or activities to be the same way every time, then we will make some people feel very comfortable every time and others excluded.

(2) Pledges are useful

After extensive engagement with the party Membership and Officers, I helped create the party’s Diversity and Inclusion Pledge. This pledge is shared with new members and prospective candidates to represent the party.

You can read the full pledge here:

I am fully aware that nice pledges, policies and platitudes by themselves don’t create change. However, a good pledge, endorsed by the party leadership, can have a positive impact.

The engagement around the ideas of diversity and inclusion pulled us together as an executive team. It was useful to be reminded of the core values and wider purpose of why we turn up to volunteer for the party. The pledge also triggered conversations within our membership, motivated action, and gave license for people to start to create tangible change.

A pledge doesn’t “solve” diversity and inclusion but it is a pretty decent step on the journey.

(3)“Politics” is loaded with preconceptions and distrust. It shouldn’t be.

It’s sad, but the most common response to me sharing that I volunteer in local politics is “oh that sort of thing isn’t for me”. 

And I might also note that the people who are most likely to respond with “me too” or “where do I sign up” are typically middle aged heterosexual cisgender white men. CLEARLY there is nothing wrong with those people participating. But it is noteworthy that the demographics of people who are typically politically active do not match the demographics of the people they would seek to represent.

This demographic mismatch is important, because the mismatch between people and politicians, results in our social and economic system being designed from limited perspectives. To give a very clear example of this- up until recently women’s sanitary products were taxed as “luxury items”. I don’t suppose this was a deliberate or malicious decision - it was just that the historically male dominated parliament simply did not experience or even see the issue. It has only been since parliament has become more balanced, and following a concerted campaign of over two decades that the tampon tax will be scrapped. BBC News article on scrapping of the tampon tax.

Why is political participation is so low? Well at a national level, corruption and cronyism are endemic. I don’t want to go into negative ramble - instead I highly recommend checking out the Good Law Project for details about ongoing corruption and how to fight it - goodlawproject.com

But having said that- local politics is actually pretty good. Every politician I’ve worked with has genuinely wanted to make a positive difference. Even my interactions with politicians from other parties has generally been positive. And more importantly, there are many charity and community groups engaged in making our community a better place to live. And although most local charities don’t class themselves as political, they by necessity work with local government to coordinate and support each other.

I guess what I’m saying, is that while our individual abilities to make an impact at a national level are limited, and that reading national press is isolating and disempowering, I would highly recommend that anyone and everyone should get involved in local community groups - like political parties, charities or other groups - because it both connecting and empowering. It makes our communities better and also enriches our lived experience.

P.S.

If you enjoyed this article, the best compliment you could give me would be to share it with someone else who might like it.

P.P.S

You can also subscribe to my blog here -

Diversity and Inclusion Pledge for the Watford Liberal Democrats

After extensive engagement with the Watford Liberal Democrat Membership and Party Officers, I helped create the party’s Diversity and Inclusion Pledge.

This pledge is shared with new members and all prospective candidates to represent the party. It is aligned with the party constitution and is built from core Liberal Democrat values.


The full pledge is as follows:

Diversity & Inclusion Pledge

Diversity and Inclusivity are at the heart of what we do in the Watford Liberal Democrats.

I believe in the constitution of the Liberal Democrats. Specifically, I believe in building and safeguarding a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.

To the best of my endeavours I commit to championing the freedom, dignity and well-being of individuals, and I acknowledge and respect individuals right to freedom of conscience and their right to develop their talents to the full.

All humans have equal value regardless of race, gender, sexuality, religion, age or any other attribute.

I believe that we should all be free to love and enter into consensual relationships with anyone we choose regardless of gender or sexuality.

I value the uniqueness of individuals: although we are all different, we all have equal value as human beings.

I believe that humans are better when we work together, I will seek to bring together, and represent, all members of the community in which I live.

I will engage with, and actively listen to, all those who will be affected by decisions made through the functioning of the local party, and any of my roles in any levels of government.

I believe that our local party is at its best when we enable all our members, activists, and volunteers to be at their best.

I believe that having all our members included and active maximises the productivity of the party, brings in new and different ideas, and most importantly, enriches our shared human experience.

I pledge to champion diversity and inclusivity through my role in the Watford Liberal Democrats and any elected position.

Northern Mega City

New paper published discussing a proposed plan for northern infrastructure investment to create a single urban centre with sufficient economic gravity to rebalance the UK economy.

Go to paper at the centre for asset studies website here

Responding to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report

I recently drafted the Watford Liberal Democrat Statement on the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report.

It’s sad that it still needs to be said that racism is bad, racism exists, and it is the moral duty of those with power to take action to end racism.

The Government’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities missed the opportunity to make a clear, bold statement on the state of race equality in this country, to expose the real issues and to make recommendations that would address them in a decisive and comprehensive manner.

Racism in the UK in 2021

The evidence and impact of racism in the UK is overwhelming - ethnic minority communities are at a disadvantage in almost all sectors of society:

In education, the difference in attainment between white working-class children and black Caribbean (British) heritage children is negligible. However, after leaving school, white working-class children are significantly more likely to be taken on into work and will likely earn more while in work.

Black Caribbean and mixed-race students are three times more likely to be expelled from school, when found to have committed similar offences to white students.

In healthcare, black women in the UK have a mortality rate which is five times higher than the UK average and have an infant mortality rate which is twice that of the UK average.

In the justice system, black men are nine times more likely to be stopped and searched. Young black people (under 16s) are more likely to be given a criminal record for the same crimes as white children.

Also overlooked are the disproportionate impacts of Covid on black communities, and the hostile environment which deported the Windrush generation who came to our country to help us rebuild after the war.

This is especially significant to me, as I am a child of the Windrush Generation. My father was born in Barbados when it was still a British colony. He moved to the UK and served our country as a Commando in the British Armed Forces. The hostile environment – where the government instructed it’s agents to assume that people exactly like my father aren’t British unless they can prove it through a convoluted and extensive process – is outrageous and should be considered a national embarrassment.

All Lives Matter

This report has echoes of the expression that because “All Lives Matter” we don’t need to say that “Black Lives Matter”. Do all lives matter? Yes. Clearly. 100%. As a Liberal Democrat I absolutely believe in equality.

The problem is not the principle that all lives matter. The problem is that we don’t treat all lives as if they mattered equally. The sad truth is that black lives in the UK are not treated as if they have equal worth. And therein lies the problem with the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report – it refuses to acknowledge the lived reality for many people in the UK.

Whilst some of recommendations made in the report are helpful, they fall far short of what could have been achieved.

While I am deeply disappointed in our government, I am not surprised given that our Prime Minster literally called Black People “piccaninnies with watermelon smiles”.

It’s sad that it needs to be repeated: racism is bad, racism exists, and it is the duty of those with power to take action to end racism.

We will remember them.

Today is Remembrance Sunday- an anniversary used to remember all the people who have died in wars. 

Remembrance Day (also known as Armistice Day) will be held on 11 November and marks the day WW1 ended, at 11am on the 11th day of the 11th month, in 1918.

These days are an important part of our shared cultural heritage. The human cost of wars has been felt in every city, town, and village in the UK. 

Every year we remember and honour those who have sacrificed themselves to secure and protect our freedom.

In addition to remembering those lives lost to war, I have donated towards, and helped Lib Dem Councilor’s and activists in Watford put up poppies in north Watford, for 3 main reasons:

  1. War exists

  2. War is bad

  3. We should try to avoid war

War exists

The poppies are part of Remembrance Day: a memorial day observed in the UK and across the Commonwealth to remember the members of their armed forces who have died in the line of duty.

The first remembrance days were held in the shadow of the Great War where as many as 8.5 million soldiers and 13 million civilians died.

In subsequent wars commonwealth servicemen and servicewomen continue to serve, continued to be injured and continue to die.

You may have heard the phrase “we will remember them”. That is what it is all about.

For me, remembrance is absolutely not a celebration of war, and it not about whether specific wars are just or unjust. It is simply about taking time to honour and respect the memories of all those lost.

It is an uncomfortable reminder, that war exists, and while it’s easy to be comfortable in our day to day existence, we should never be complacent.

War is bad

To me it’s quite uncontroversial to state that war is bad. 

I can accept that wars of self defence can be justified and, let’s be clear, fighting the nazi’s was absolutely righteous and a moral necessity.

But as a fundamental position, the hurt and suffering, the economic and social damage, and the trauma, from any war is bad.

After the 1950’s Korean War (in which over 100,000 British troops served) an expression became popular in the USA: “Freedom is not free”. 

There is a cost to liberty, and while we will all individually determine whether the costs are worth paying, the cost itself is bad.

We should try to avoid war

Essentially, If we want to live in peace we must work towards peace.

To quote from President John F. Kennedy’s Strategy for Peace

“Let us focus ... on a more practical, more attainable peace-- based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions--on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements which are in the interest of all concerned.”

Avoiding war does not require naive unilateral action, but a sustained political effort to find compromises and agreements for mutual benefit.

We owe it to the memory of those before us to avoid making the same mistakes that led to the wars in which they gave so much.

At a time of global tensions between super powers, of climate change, urbanisation, water scarcity, and rising sea levels, the risk of war will continue to grow if we do not actively try to avoid it.

It is paramount that seek out the humanity in others. We must lean into the world through international institutions. We must prioritise shared cultural understanding and the exchange of ideas.

To give the final word back to President Kennedy:

“For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal.”