Political, Rants&Rambles

Leading Light or Lead Balloon?

Labour’s predicament is that Jeremy Corbyn is hugely unpopular. His poll ratings are worse than for any comparable leader in British polling history. The gap between his standing and that of the PrimeMinister Mrs. May is now alarmingly wide. In a recent poll, 17% approved of Corbyn’s leadership and 58% disapproved. The comparable figures for Mrs. May were 46% and 33%. (In both cases, the rest had no opinion).

A recent article in the left-leaning Guardian newspaper suggested that the policies of the Labour Party were actually quite popular with the electorate right up to the point where Corbyn’s name was associated with them.

There are those amongst his many supporters within the party who argue that Corbyn is being judged both prematurely and by the wrong standards. Those attracted to him were looking for a different model of leadership, whose role is to empower, to galvanise and to operate as a standard bearer of a new mass movement.

In this context it could be useful to explore James MacGregor Burns’s distinction between ‘transactional’ and ‘transforming’ leadership. The former envisages leadership in terms of a transaction between the leader and other players in the party. For example, a leader may seek the co-operation and compliance of others through offering a range of incentives, such as policy concessions and personal advancement. Each party to a bargain would be aware of the power resources, proclivities, and preferences of others, and would engage in a process of mutual adjustment.

Transforming leadership, in contrast, envisages as the crucial leadership functions teaching, inspiring and energising, with fervor and dedication in the service of promoting a party’s collective purposes. Endowed with clear visions, transformational leaders are primarily concerned with the advocacy and pursuit of wide-ranging values – such as social justice and equality – and are loath to engage in too many compromises that might jeopardise them.

This approach meshes well as the radical (or ‘hard’) left’s model of the party. Labour’s prime purpose should be to give effect to the ideals and objectives with which it was historically associated. These should be embodied in policies determined by the wider party, and not by any parliamentary conclave. The role of the leader should be to ‘rally their own side effectively’, to appeal to the party’s base and to facilitate both its democratisation and ‘an empowerment of a new grassroots movement.’ Corbyn’s role as a transforming leader is, in short, to invigorate, mobilise and enthuse as the new voice and standard-bearer of a remoralised party.

Corbyn’s ability to perform this role has undoubtedly been severely handicapped by an unrelentingly and often venomously hostile media. It also needs to be said that his limitations as a communicator and his inability to convey the impression of a man possessing the skills and stature of a prime minister in waiting has not helped.

This is widely recognized (at least by his critics). But, even more fundamentally, his very concept of leadership– the leader as transformer – is flawed.

Here it may be useful to take the argument further by citing Weber’s distinction between ‘the ‘ethic of responsibility’ and the ‘ethic of ultimate ends.’ A political leader who accepts the former is animated by a prudential and calculating spirit, is acutely aware of the consequences of any action, and sees political choice in terms of balancing priorities and awkward trade-offs.

But the ‘ethic of responsibility’ can too easily slide into opportunism, careerism, self-serving actions and mere expediency. It is this that the ‘ethic of ultimate ends’ vehemently rejects. It stands for a more steadfast, determined, and uncompromising form of politics driven by principle and honesty. Corbyn’s appeal for many in Labour’s ranks is that he embodied this ‘ethic of ultimate ends’ and rejected Labour’s customary mode of leadership, with all its equivocations, evasions, and half-measures.

The danger is that the personal appropriation of a higher morality and a disregard for pragmatism and compromise can transmute into unyielding and obdurate political stance. As Weber commented, ‘the believer in an ethic of ultimate ends feels “responsible” only for seeing to it that the flame of pure intentions is not quenched.’ 

This might be compatible with effective leadership when a leader directs a tightly centralised party with full mastery of its key institutions. But Corbyn presides over a party in which power is dispersed among a whole range of institutions, several of which are centres of resistance to his rule. Labour is riven by multiple divisions, over policy, strategy, ideology and, most of all, internal organisation.

Most damagingly, it is suffering from a veritable crisis of legitimacy.

At present, Corbynistas and their critics lack a shared understanding of the ground-rules and values (democracy, accountability, and representation) which should underpin and validate the way in which power is distributed, decisions taken, and sovereignty located. In short, Corbyn both lacks consent and is hemmed in by institutional constraints, without control of decisive levers of power and the confidence of key players.

In such circumstances transforming leadership imbued by an ethic of ultimate ends is peculiarly inappropriate. Labour is a pluralist organisation composed of people attached to a range of often divergent interests, objectives, and values. When this is compounded by profound internal divisions, the skills of a transactional leader are essential.

This mode of leadership ‘requires a shrewd eye for opportunity, a good hand at bargaining, persuading, reciprocating.’ It demands an orientation to leadership governed by the ethic of responsibility, incorporating an open and conciliatory style of engagement, a ‘capacity to modulate personal and political ambitions by patient calculation and realistic appraisal of situations’ and an overriding emphasis upon the importance of reaching consensus and coalition-building. It involves accommodating public opinion with membership preferences, regulating disagreements, astute political maneuvering and a capacity, above all, to hold the party together.

Corbyn has merits – decency, honesty, integrity – but it is not at all evident that concept of leadership is what the party requires.

Food

Ginger Stout Cake

INGREDIENTS

  • 2 tablespoons unsalted butter, at room temperature
  • 125 grams raw (Demerara) sugar (1/2 cup)
  • 1 cup stout
  • 1 cup molasses/treacle
  • ½ teaspoon baking soda
  • 340 grams plain flour (2 cups)
  • 1 tablespoon ground ginger
  • 1 teaspoon cinnamon
  • ¼ teaspoon ground cloves
  • ¼ teaspoon freshly grated nutmeg
  • ¼ teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
  • ¼ teaspoon allspice
  • ¼ teaspoon fine salt
  • 3 tablespoons grated fresh ginger
  • 3 large eggs, at room temperature
  • 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
  • 210 grams dark brown sugar, lightly packed (1 cup)
  • 200 grams granulated sugar (1 cup)
  • ¾ cup sunflower oil

PREPARATION

  1. Heat oven to 350 degrees. Grease a Bundt pan well with the softened butter. Coat the entire pan with raw sugar so that it sticks to the butter. Turn the pan over to dump out any excess sugar.
  2. Add the stout and molasses to a medium saucepan and bring to a simmer. Remove from the heat. Carefully whisk in the baking soda and let cool to room temperature. Be careful as the stout mixture will bubble up.
  3. Sift together the flour, ground spices, pepper and salt. Set aside.
  4. In the bowl of an electric mixer fitted with the whisk attachment, mix the fresh ginger, eggs, vanilla extract, dark brown sugar, and granulated sugar on medium speed for five minutes.
  5. Turn the mixer down to low speed and add the oil. Mix for another 5 minutes. Slowly add the stout mixture and mix for another 5 minutes.
  6. Carefully add the dry ingredients in two parts, mixing well in between each addition.
  7. Pour the batter into the prepared pan. Bake for 55 to 65 minutes, or until a cake tester comes out clean. Let the cake cool for 15 minutes and then flip upside down to release while still warm. Let cool completely.

Home, Rants&Rambles

Healthy

In our house we are counting down months towards retirement, which is both a positive expectation and a financial worry.

It isn’t about how long we expect to live for necessarily since the cost of living will change as our old age changes. The first ten years will be relatively expensive as we plan to travel and enjoy our lives. We’ll also  probably end up spending some money helping to make our kids independent lives a little easier.

Then we’ll probably start to settle down and travel less extensively, live closer to home, more baby sitting and less rock climbing.

And finally we’ll settle into proper old age when our biggest weekly trip will be to the supermarket and relatives, maybe the bridge club once a week, with a (hopefully) brief last two years when physically it all goes “tits up”. The last seems to be true whenever you die, whether at 60 or 90: the last two years can be grim.

Life expectancy at age 65 for men in the UK reached 18.4 years in 2012–2014 and for women it reached 20.9 years. This means that a man aged 65 could expect to live to age 83 and a woman to nearly age 86.

In 2009-11, Disability-Free Life Expectancy (DFLE) for males at birth was 63.9 years, for females it was longer at 64.4 years. Despite having shorter DFLE, males expect to spend a greater proportion of their lives (81.0%) free from disability, compared to females (77.8%). basically women live longer but not in perfect health. Disability can hide a multitude of sins at this age, but given our socio-economic class the cards are stacked in our favour a little.

 

Before we all rush to book one-way tickets to Dignitas when we are 80, it is important to remember that many older people have no social care needs. If you ask people what they would do, knowing now what they do about old age, to prepare for it.

The advice went something like this: make a will, make a living will, put in place power of attorney, have a pension, avoid being overweight, don’t smoke, drink moderately, stay active, think about your needs in old age before you get there and, if necessary, downsize and move to somewhere more suitable, don’t stick your head in the sand about old age, have a social network, stay mentally active, keep out of hospital if you can (a geriatrician told me that 10 days in hospital is equivalent to 10 years of muscle wasting in elderly people), work for as long as you can, and find what you enjoy and do it.

That is as much as we have control over. Except, knowing all this, we may also want to start voting for a political party that invests in elder care. You know, just in case.

London

Tate Britain: David Hockney

Some exhibitions are just a joy to wander around and the Hockney retrospective at Tate Britain ticks all of the requisite boxes.

His early work rapidly turns into a recognisably Hockey palette of colours.

And in modern days it’s difficult to remember that homosexuality was illegal in many parts of the world, certainly frowned upon in large parts of the States when he was living and painting in California.

His portrait exhibition last year was disappointing, not because of it’s skill but because of the curation – it’s physically difficult to enjoy three rooms of head, all in the same colours, all with no information beyond a name and number.

Yet in this exhibition his portraits of friends “sing”.

And the portraits of his parents, especially his mother, are tender.

The scope of work and his foray into collage were well represented.

As were his monumental British scenes including an excellent installation showing a simple country road in all four seasons.
The whole exhibition was a delight. Juts watch out for the crowds.

Food

White Chocolate Cake

In my 40s I developed an allergy for peanuts so was interested in this recipe where tahini is substituted making a rather fudge tasting cake. Next time around I might actually add fudge pieces in place of white chocolate, or caramel pieces to decorate. It’s worth bearing in mind that the cake is large (each piece weighed 750g wet going into each tin) so probably one for an afternoon tea or very light main course.

Ingredients

  • 320g caster sugar
  • 350g plain flour
  • 1.5 tsp bicarbonate of soda
  • 1.5 tsp baking powder
  • 1 tsp table salt
  • Zest of 2 lemons
  • 70g chopped white chocolate
  • 2 eggs
  • 120ml vegetable oil
  • 230g tahini paste or peanut butter
  • 1 tbs vanilla essence
  • 200g yoghurt with 40g milk (or 240g buttermilk)
  • 180g boiling water

For the icing

  • 250g mascarpone
  • 200g double cream
  • 200g full-fat plain cream cheese
  • 80g icing sugar
  • 1 tbs vanilla essence
  • Optional sprinkling 30g chopped white chocolate/lemon zest

Heat oven to 170C fan (190C /gas mark 5). Mix all the dry ingredients together in a large bowl.

In a smaller bowl mix the eggs with the oil, tahini, vanilla and buttermilk, then combine the two mixes, before slowly adding the boiling water. Mix until everything is well incorporated.

Line the base of two 9in cake tins with a round of baking paper. Divide the mix evenly between the two tins, place both in the centre of the oven and bake for 20 minutes.

Rotate for an even bake and return to the oven for a further 10-20 minutes. The cakes should feel bouncy and have a good golden colour all over. Remove from the oven and carefully flip the cakes to flatten the tops. Allow to cool upside down.

Make the icing by mixing all the ingredients together with a small whisk until well combined and thickened. If you are using an electric mixer, use a paddle to avoid overworking the mix and splitting it.

Place the first cake on a serving platter, top with half the icing, spread around and top with the second cake. Add the rest of the icing on top, spread and, if you wish, sprinkle with chopped white chocolate and lemon zest.

If serving on the same day, it is best to avoid placing the cake in the fridge. If you are keeping it for longer do place it in the fridge, but allow it to come to room temperature before serving.

Political, Rants&Rambles

Yes, but…

Some of the political absurdities that we now have to wade through as part of the brexit discussions or debate.

The UK trade secretary would break the law if he did his job

After he took the role of international trade secretary, Liam Fox boasted that he would have “about a dozen free trade deals outside the EU” ready for when Britain left. But it is of course illegal for Britain, as an EU member state, to negotiate bilateral trade deals. Fox later quietly backtracked on his promise. No one knows what he’s doing with his time at the moment.

Theresa May’s promises on food labelling are straight outta North Korea 

In a speech at the Conservative party conference, May promised that Britain would now control how it labels food. But these rules have nothing to do with the EU. They come from a general code at the World Trade Organisation (WTO). For May to deliver on this promise, she would have to adopt the North Korean model of total isolation. She either didn’t know what she was saying was nonsense, or didn’t care.

Eczema sufferers should worry

If you want to sell pharmaceuticals in Europe, they have to have been cleared by European regulators. While we’re in the EU, that’s the case for the UK too. But what happens after we leave? Will a British regulator take up the slack? A fast, hard Brexit of the type being demanded by some Tory MPs would leave a window between leaving the EU and setting up our own regulators. During that period, drug firms wouldn’t be able to get their products authorised for the UK market, so, for a while, there would be no new eczema creams, asthma inhalers or any other new treatments available to British patients.

The government is pretending bad news doesn’t exist

Directors of trade bodies – many of them facing economic and regulatory disaster – went in to brief David Davis when he was made Brexit secretary. But before they got to his office they were taken to one side by civil servants and advised to go in saying Brexit was full of “opportunities”. Anyone who didn’t tended to be asked to leave after five minutes.

Most people aren’t that fussed about freedom of movement

If there’s one thing everyone accepts the Brexit vote demonstrated, it’s that people want to end freedom of movement. Except this isn’t true. Poll after poll taken during and after the campaign found that between 20% and 40% of leave voters either support immigration or prioritise the economy over reducing it – or just want to remain in the single market.

We need an army of trade negotiators. We barely have a platoon

Or at least we didn’t when we voted to leave Europe. Whitehall is now on a massive recruitment drive. We urgently need an army of general trade experts and ones with specialist knowledge in areas such as intellectual property law. The costs are painfully high. Some are quoting day rates of £3,000 to do consultancy work for the UK government. If they are hired full-time, their salaries will be lower – probably around the £100,000 mark.

Banks will have a good excuse to sack people 

City bankers don’t have time to sit around waiting to find out what May’s Brexit plan is. In order to avoid losing passporting rights in Europe, they have to register an office with regulators on the continent – a process that could take years. They are therefore likely to make “no regret” decisions, meaning they will do things they wanted to do anyway. In this case, that means moving back-office administrative staff to locations with cheaper rents and lower salaries, such as Warsaw. The less you earn, the more likely you are to be affected.

The frontline of Britain’s battle with Europe could move from Brussels to Geneva 

Brexiters argue that if we don’t get a good deal from the EU, we can fall back on WTO rules. They couldn’t be more wrong. The EU is a member of the Geneva-based WTO too. If the UK tries to unilaterally separate its trade arrangements from the EU without getting its agreement first, Brussels can trigger a trade dispute. For Britain to secure a decent relationship with the WTO, it needs to make sure it is on good terms with the EU.

There are no rules for what Britain is doing because no one has been stupid enough to try it

If Britain does pursue a hard Brexit, things get murky. There are no rules on how an existing WTO member leaves a customs union, because no one has ever been crazy enough to try it. Lawyers at the organisation are trying to sort out how this works and what the process will be.

Britain is going to pretend it’s still in the EU (don’t tell anyone) 

If Britain is to going to ensure stability during its transition from the EU to independent membership of the WTO, it will have to replicate all the EU’s tariffs (charges on imports and exports). This makes a mockery of everything Brexit stands for, of course, but if we changed any tariff, it would trigger an avalanche of trade disputes and lobbying operations. If Britain was to raise tariffs on ham, for instance, it would trigger protests and formal dispute claims from not just European ham producers, but those all over the world.

The UK steel industry could collapse overnight

There’s an EU agreement at the WTO preventing China from dumping cheap steel in Europe. Without it, plants such as Port Talbot would collapse as Chinese product flooded the market. When Britain leaves the EU, it will claim that it is still a signatory to this agreement and the Chinese will object. This dispute is likely to last for years. If Britain loses, it will likely lose its domestic steel industry.

You can’t just copy and paste EU law 

Ministers want to transfer all EU laws into Britain using the so-called great reform bill. The trouble is, they don’t know where to find them. The Equalities Act, for instance, is a messy mixture of EU and UK legislation. In every area of law, there are bits and pieces of EU directives. Good luck tracking them all down.

Article 50 isn’t actually a trade deal

Leaving the EU involves three things: an administrative divorce, the untangling of British and EU law, and (probably) a new trade deal. But only the first aspect is dealt with in article 50. The rest is up to Europe’s discretion. If they want to just talk admin, we can’t do much about it.

British divorcees in Europe may become half-married

If European countries don’t like the way article 50 talks go, they could decide to not recognise legal decisions from London. At a snap, British divorcees who live in Europe would suddenly find themselves in a state of marital limbo – with their home country recognising their divorced status, but their adopted country considering them married.

Britain (and its tabloid press) could end up demanding a hard border with Ireland

Britain and Ireland enjoy legal protections against EU immigration law which allow them to “continue to make arrangements between themselves relating to the movement of persons between their territories”. This should prevent Brussels imposing a hard border for people in Ireland. But there are no protections against tabloid scare stories. After Brexit, we can expect campaigns about Polish plumbers crossing into England from Ireland to work. It will be nonsense – Polish people could just as easily use tourist visas – but it could be politically effective. If a hard border returns to Ireland, it will be because of Britain, not the EU.

Screwing up trade with Europe = screwing up trade with the world 

Leaving the single market will sever Britain’s relationship with its largest trading destination, but the problems don’t end there. Europe also has agreements with other major economies such as the US and Japan allowing it to transport goods without expensive and slow border checks. If Britain leaves the single market, we’ll lose these too. Oops.

What’s good for the burger lover isn’t good for the beef farmer …

A bilateral trade deal with the US would see cheaper burgers in the UK. The Americans have lower animal-welfare standards, use growth hormones in their meat and have larger farms. This won’t be good news for British farmers, who will also be facing sky-high export tariffs and a possible end to subsidies. And it won’t be good news for animal rights campaigners. But burger lovers might be pleased.

… not to mention British vets, who don’t enjoy watching cows being slaughtered 

EU law insists on an independent veterinary presence in abattoirs. The problem is that 95% of the vets doing this job in Britain are European – most of them from Spain. The problem is one of demand. British vets study for years to cure family pets, not watch cows being slaughtered. But Europeans have less of a cultural hang-up about that type of thing and are also willing to accept the lower wages involved. If Britain doesn’t train up more domestic vets for the abattoirs, it won’t be able to sell meat to Europe or properly check it for disease.

Our battered fish isn’t actually our battered fish

British fishermen want the UK to prise open the incredibly complex European system for allocating national quotas of fish stocks and renegotiate the whole thing. That will take a long time and a lot of manpower. If they get it wrong, the UK could face problems. The type of white meat we like for fish and chips doesn’t actually come from the UK – most of it comes from the seas around Norway and Iceland.

Britain may be about to adopt lower US standards on … everything

The Americans have lower consumer standards than Europe on pretty much everything, from chemical safety to data protection. A bilateral trade deal will see them demand we lower our standards so their products can enter our market more freely. Given how desperate we’ll be, we’re likely to comply.

Political, Rants&Rambles

Majority

The difference between leave and remain was 3.8% or 1.3 million in favour of Leave. However, in a close analysis, virtually all the polls show that the UK electorate wants to remain in the EU, and has wanted to remain since referendum day. Moreover, according to predicted demographics, the UK will want to remain in the EU for the foreseeable future.

And it makes not a penny of difference because the PM has sent the letter to the EU and we have asked to leave.

There have been more than 13 polls since June 23rd which have asked questions similar to ‘Would you vote the same again’ or ‘Was the country right to vote for Brexit’. People haven’t changed their minds. If you voted leave then you still want to leave. If you voted remain then you still want to remain, but of course many people failed to vote.

Eleven of the polls indicate that the majority in the UK do not want Brexit largely because of those who failed to vote.

It’s important to remember how tight the vote turned out to be. The poll predictions leading up to the referendum narrowed but a significant majority of late polls indicated that the country wanted to remain. The leader of UKIP even conceded defeat on the night of the vote, presumably because the final polls were convincing that Remain would win.

In fact, according to the first post-referendum poll (Ipsos/Newsnight, 29th June), those who did not vote all 12.9m of them,  were, by a ratio of 2:1, Remain supporters. It is well known that polls affect both turnout and voting, particularly when it looks as though a particular result is a foregone conclusion. It seems, according to the post-referendum polls, that this was the case. More Remain than Leave supporters who, for whatever reason, found voting too difficult, chose the easier option not to vote, probably because they believed that Remain would win.

brexit-polls-oct-2016Percentage lead of LEAVE or REMAIN according to the polls post June 23rd

By now (March 2017) with Article 50 initiated, there will be approximately 563,000 new 18-year-old voters, with approximately a similar number of deaths, the vast majority (83%) amongst those over 65. Assuming those who voted stick with their decision and based on the age profile of the referendum result, that, alone, year on year adds more to the Remain majority.

A Financial Times model indicated that simply based on that demographic profile, by 2021 the result would be reversed and that will be the case for the foreseeable future.

Sadly nothing less than a second, fairer referendum could redress the unfairness felt by the exclusion from the electorate of both the 16-18s and the non-UK EU residents. This all paints a very sorry picture of the effectiveness of UK democracy. Brexit is not the will of the people in the UK. It never has been. Had all the people spoken on the day the result would almost certainly be what the pollsters had predicted, and what the UK, according to the polls, still wants, and that is to Remain.

We are where are. Calls to unite together behind the brexit banner are loud and insistent.

They can fuck off.

Fun, Home

Peru

I’ve never travelled to South America, so given that Macchu Picchu has always been on my wishlist, and given the sad sad compromise that a trip to Andalusia turned out to be, it was a pretty obvious place to plan a 2017 trip especially since BA has now started up non-stop flights through to a number of S American capitals.

So we will fly from London Gatwick straight through to Lima in Peru for a brief overnight stay at the airport hotel before flying on to Cusco. A number of people suggested that given a choice, I should cut down on time in Lima in order to spend longer in Cusco which is supposed to be a beautiful place to hang out as well as the obvious stopover to acclimatise and see the sacred Valley of the Incas.

From there we travel on to Ollantaytambo where we catch the tourist train to Macchu Picchu, staying overnight at nearby Aguas Clients before travelling back to Cusco.

From there (and after a couple of days chilling out) we catch the tourist bus to Puno, the obvious place to stay over and visit lake Titicaca.

Rather than turn around and head home at this stage, or visit the Nazca Lines, we decided to head towards La Paz in Bolivia. I may or may not visit South America again, and if not, I wanted to have seen the salt pains at Uyuni. So from la Paz, we fly down to the salt flats and a stay in a salt hotel before flying back to La Paz, onto Lima and home.

And one of the reasons is that the eldest has decided she won’t be coming with us this year so we might as well go for the longest of long-haul flights since she truly hates flying (my fault!)

Next year, it’s going to be all four of us and Iceland is on the cards – not too far, not too similar.

 

Home

March Garden

The crocus from the beginning of the month have disappeared and the magnolia and camellia are in full flight.

The Spring garden is a delight, a real delight. Even the hellebores are holding on to their flowers.

Some of the daffodils are still around, but most are on their way out, even the tiny narcissus which newly planted under the hedge have proved a really jolly delight.

Maybe next Autumn I’ll plant some white mascara to continue along the flowery border. White would probably strike out from the greenery rather than the established blue in the beds.

The miniature tulips are out in full, but the large ones are just beginning to show through.

And is this some convallaria or a huge late snowdrop that has suddenly appeared?

If the gaffs newly planted have been a great idea, planting giant alliums in the fritelaria bed has been less successful – they look like triffids.

It’s a shame because obviously the fritelarias themselves are so delicate and beautiful.

Primroses and primulas can be found scattered through the gravel garden and gravel path.

But they’re also popping up in the back, in the dry shade.

Mostly though it’s dry, dryer and driest of shade with the green of the euphorbia and white of comfrey not doing much to life the gloom.

New bird feeders make it a surprisingly entertaining place to sit, but a few more flowers would be nice.

Up on top of the roof the aubrietia has survived despite my decision to rip most of it out as a weed a month ago but the lithodora is pretty dull and disappearing. Even the blue chinodoxa disappears in the sunshine. Maybe blue flowers are just too dull for this time of year.

Many of the sedums are just beginning their grow back after the Winter.

The rhodanthemum doesn’t seem to ever stop flowering but is definitely moving into full out daisies and the erysimum is pushing out yellow flowers everywhere.

I am a bit confused by some bulbs that appear to have come up blind but have left them in just in case they turn out to be alliums.

Thankfully the new rose bed seems to have survived the Winter, though the gaffs planted with them are a bit mixed. What fool grows a flower too heavy to stand up?

Nothing significant has died, though I might well wish the gigantic alliums had proved less happy. As always the reddest of tulips are the hardest to get rid of and have popped up as vigorous as ever. Why did I plant them? Why?

The bedding has reappeared and the wallflowers continue relentlessly.


 And then I look at the most lovely magnolia, a small but delicate little tree that will grow no higher.

And behind it the pear tree just heading into blossom.

There is no downside to a Spring garden, just the joy of plants arriving and the promise of all to come.