To all readers:

The photo is from Hamleys toy store Christmas window display. It shows one little bear in the bottom right trying to saw off the legs of his Dad’s chair and another little bear swinging from the chandeliers which made me LOL! This is probably the sweetest and wittiest display I’ve seen in recent years and I love it.

LAST-MINUTE XMAS SHOPPING

After yesterday’s experiences I now know NOT to go into my usual Chinese supermarket on Christmas Eve. Naively, I thought queues would only afflict Western grocery stores, but oh no! The queue I ended up in was about 15 people deep and it was almost impossible to move along the aisles (not helped by the fact most Chinese supermarkets have tiny aisles because we don’t use trolleys and we’re physically tiny). So I endured queuing discomforts all for the sake of picking up some Pangasius Strykker (similar to catfish) for Saturday’s lunch, white fungus (to make a classic Chinese sweet pudding broth) and some grass jelly drinks to go with my Christmas lunch.

CHRISTMAS LUNCH

I’ve NEVER cooked turkey and, if I ever did, I’d probably do a sticky barbeque version with the turkey marinated overnight in my special mixture (hoisin sauce, soy sauce, tomato puree, orange honey, cumin, fennel, coriander, black pepper and sesame oil). There would be no sausage meet stuffing; instead we’d have dried fruits and bell peppers soaked in some brandy, flavored with 5 spices and bound with breadcrumbs, eggs and corn starch. Then I’d make roast potatoes and stir-fried vegetables (sugar snap peas, various mushrooms and baby carrots). To finish I’d serve a Kirsch brandy triple chocolate gateau with lashings of whipped cream and pan-fried plums.

HOWEVER, as usual, I’m not cooking a traditional Christmas lunch. This is what I’m making:

* Roasted smoky BBQ rabbit legs, wrapped in bacon and served with sautéed vegetables (parsnips and sugar snap peas) and a sticky BBQ dressing

* Crispy fried rabbit quarters in an Italian herbs and mixed nuts batter

* Golden aroma chili crab (my absolute favorite)

* Stuffed roasted peppers (with chicken, couscous and coriander)

* Desirée potatoes (sliced, parboiled and then grilled with olive oil and seasoning)

* Salad of roquette, lettuce, coriander, peppers and mixed seeds

* A creamy pear and mango pudding with polenta

After this, everyone will be on a diet for about 3 months — ha ha.

LONDON LIGHTS

Here are some Xmas lights at Harrods and Harvey Nicks:

BOXING DAY SALES

This photo made me think. Reports are that people were queuing from as early as 2 AM outside stores for the Boxing Day sales. Most stores started their sales promotions before Christmas, but the brand label stores like Selfridges, Harrods, Harvey Nichols, Bond Street ones, etc. have waited until Boxing Day. The police are positioned at various stores like Selfridges and Gucci to control the crowds (and to prevent fisticuffs breaking out).

There are lots of items on offer for 50% reduction and, apparently, the women are going crazy over GBP500 handbags which now cost about GBP250-300 — as can be seen in the picture below:

No, there will be no handbags at dawn for me; I have 0 interest in GBP exorbitant handbags or household clutter I don’t need. There are more interesting ways to spend money!

NEW YEAR 2010

I’ll be in Italy somewhere — that is if there’s no repeat of snow and the flights aren’t grounded.

Have a wonderful weekend of festivities with your families, all, and here’s hoping you give and receive meaningful presents!

Here are some useful sites for those interested in the events, personalities and conclusions of the last fortnight:

· http://en.cop15.dk/

· http://unfccc.int/2860.php

· http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/climate-change/copenhagen-2

· http://www.copenhagenclimatecouncil.com/

· http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/default.stm

Now what to make of various global leaders’ attempts to persuade, criticize or strong arm others into defined targets, implementation timetables, funding allocations and international monitoring……………WELL……………………

You know how in those disaster or alien invasion movies like ‘Independence Day’ and ‘The Day After Tomorrow’ where all the nations unite to fight off and defeat a common enemy and at the end of the movie there are saccharin sweet scenes that show LOVE IS UNIVERSAL and that, ultimately, we all belong to the same family (and regardless of cultural differences we all care about our families):

Hmmn………………..

Let’s just say that we should hope the Martians don’t invade us any time soon because, if they did, we wouldn’t stand a chance. It’s pretty clear from Copenhagen 2009 that national vested interests would mean NO country would be prepared to make concessions for the greater good and our species’ survival.

The Martians would find us as divided over climate change (including whether it even exists) as they would over whether there are aliens and how many troops each country would be prepared to put into battle against them.

Yes, it’s a ridiculous scenario but it also highlights some of the absurdities of high-level politics. LOL.

Now, please will readers also excuse this observation of an even bigger paradox:

· FOR DECADES DEVELOPED COUNTRIES COMMITTED US$ TRILLIONS IN AID TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO EVOLVE THEMSELVES INTO INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS, away from their agricultural heritage.

· This was regarded as a means by which to improve their GDP and export capabilities beyond growing vegetables and fishing and — in the parallel process — to enable them to enjoy equivalent political democracy, educational provision, as universal a healthcare system as affordable and secure housing and policing which the developed countries enjoy.

· YET NOW THE DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ARE OFFERING AID IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE VERY SAME DEVELOPING COUNTRIES NOT TO INDUSTRIALIZE THEMSELVES BECAUSE IT’S APPARENTLY CAUSING POLLUTION AND INCREASING CO2 EMISSIONS.

Plus monies to help them in case the sea levels rise as a result of climate change and entire villages get destroyed.

This paradox aside, the US delegation seems to have made misjudgments in the way they negotiated with the Chinese delegation. It’s worth bearing in mind that, unlike President Obama, the Chinese government does not have powerful green lobby groups pressurizing them into action or to grandstand to win opinion polls and elections. The fact that they had been progressively opening up to conducive negotiations at Copenhagen 2009 seems to have bypassed President Obama’s advisors.

Prior to Copenhagen, the Chinese government had been commended for its collaborative efforts and leadership in its climate change approach:

· http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/03/graham-chinas-leading-the_n_379069.html

· http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-11/25/content_12538131.htm

· http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/sep/23/climate-change-copenhagen-china-india

Ergo, it’s unfortunate that President Obama made the speech he did and offended the Chinese government. If a Chinese person, out of goodwill and greater good interests, proactively offers to take action and then the other party turns around on a world stage and, effectively, says they don’t believe the Chinese will do what they say, then that is an insult.

If China offers to take action — no matter how small the step and without someone watching over them and micro-managing them, then they WILL take action. Moreover, NO ONE likes to be micro-managed or coerced into action. They like to be trusted with getting on with their responsibilities and being collaborative.

Copenhagen 2009 is an example of different cultures not quite getting each other’s meaning and intent — whether that is developed and developing or climate change campaigners and skeptics.

Hopefully, 2010 will bring better understanding.

Well, it was bound to happen. It was simply a matter of when. The UK Chancellor in his Pre-Budget Report has announced the following measures to deal with the challenges (read SIZEABLE DEFICIT) the UK finds itself in:

* A 0.5% increase in National Insurance Contributions from everyone earning over GBP20,000 per annum as from 2011.

* Government borrowing in 2009 will rise to GBP178bn instead of the previously forecasted GBP175bn.

* Immediate introduction of 50 percent tax on any individual discretionary bonus in the banking sector of more GBP25,000.

More information is available on these sites. Please note that they link to original source materials from HM Treasury, professional perspectives from accounting firms like PwC and also to media commentators. When assessing a budget (any budget) it’s wise to examine it from a 360-2020 rather than just accept whatever the government, opposition party, professional advisory or media position is.

The issue with budget numbers is that they are often “sliced and diced” according to some pre-existing political strategy (whether that’s between actual political parties or business units within a company or left-leaning, centrist, right-wing mouthpiece), so it’s better to be as analytically impartial and objective as possible!

* http://prebudget.treasury.gov.uk/

* http://www.kpmg.eu/pbr2009/

* http://www.pwc.co.uk/eng/issues/budget.html

* http://www.ukbudget.com/PreBudget2009/index.cfm

* http://www.ifs.org.uk/projects/314

* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7740897.stm

* http://www.ft.com/indepth/pre-budget-report

* http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/6767287/Pre-Budget-report-2009-the-key-points-at-a-glance.html

* http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/dec/09/economy-pre-budget-report

* http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091209-708474.html

Interestingly, my mother and I very recently had a spirited debate about whether bankers’ bonuses should be taxed. I explained to her about RBS’s board arguing that they should be able to pay their bankers GBP million bonuses from a GBP1.5 billion bonus pool:

* · http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/6503459/RBS-bankers-threaten-exodus-over-bonus-policy.html

My mother said that it is “NOT RIGHT” that bankers responsible for the global financial crisis and decimating the value of people’s shares and life savings should be rewarded for their “lack of fulfillment of responsibility — the responsibility to take people’s money and GROW IT, TURN IT INTO A PROFIT, A YIELD, ETC.”

I explained to her about current EU laws of employment contract and how some people are arguing that to tax bankers’ bonuses would:

(1.) Contravene EU human rights (apparently).

(2.) Be unenforceable because it would require EVERY financial institution’s participation or bankers would simply move from one culture that pays them a poor bonus to one that pays more.

(3.) Result in an exodus by financial institutions from the UK to more favorable tax regimes like Switzerland or Ireland.

She was fairly disappointed that some bankers are adopting this position and also angry that ordinary households have had to bail out the banks and now are expected to stay schtum about GBP million bonuses from failures. She noted that it sends out the wrong message: we will reward you, regardless — even for your incompetence.

I also tried to explain to her the concepts of retrospective clawbacks and how the lawyers are saying that that’s not easy to enforce either.

She didn’t buy that either.

She was so shocked by the bonus culture of the banking sector, I reminded her: “I don’t make the laws, the rules and the codes of conduct.”

To which she replied, “Well, the people in power need to change the laws, rules and codes of conduct if bankers are losing everyone money.”

“Ah,” I said, “Not EVERY banker is losing their shareholders, their clients and their bank’s money. Now, let’s think of former colleagues of mine who are highly competent, socially responsible and work seriously hard and smart. Should they be penalized by some knee jerk blanket tax on all bankers because of a handful of idiots who happened to have controlled US$ billions of what is now known to be toxic mortgage assets?”

“No, of course not! If they do a good job they should be rewarded. It gives them an incentive to work hard and smart.”

“Right. Also, how would you like it if I was still a banker, called you one day and said, “Mama, you know how I worked 18 hours a day, completed Project XYZ, we earned US$ millions in the transaction………And now because of some idiot mortgage guy my bonus is going to be taxed 50 percent………..How would you feel if I called you and said this?”

“I’d be upset and angry for you. Why should you lose a bonus you worked hard towards.”

“EXACTLY!”

Great……so I’m looking forward to our next conversation when I explain to her about the Pre-Budget proposals — LOL!

Here’s the thing: as a former banker I’m more than informed about how the bonus system actually works and that some bankers merit and earn their bonuses more than others. By my rule book this would include:

* long-term strategic benefits on behalf of their clients (i.e. consistent increase in profit over 3-5 years);

* wider community engagement (e.g., they assist in outreach programs with local schools in deprived areas); and

* foster the positive reputation of their team, their unit, their bank and their profession.

Unfortunately, some bankers simply don’t have these considerations. They’re selfish, egotistical and into hubris (and destroying other’s lives and finances in their wake).

However, there are also some OUTSTANDINGLY BRILLIANT BANKERS who complete their responsibilities with insight, seriousness and with high morals and standards. It’s not their fault the “Triple I’s (ignoble, incompetent idiots) lied to them about the toxic mortgage poo-poo and they’re now the ones having to clean up the mess AND getting their bonuses taxed.

Go, the good bankers! Boo the bad ones!