Some good news dug up by La Vanguardia the other day. They discovered that two Arabs were working as police officers in Nou Barris one of the areas where many immigrants live (17.6 of all the city's immigrants) and they had been particularly effective in policing Cuidad Meridiana which has a 35% immigrant population.
It seems Zuhair and Soraya ( not sure if they were real names) inspire confindence in that they prevent the communication breakdown which often takes place when an Arab person is arrested - or even just questioned. They also have a good nose as to what's going on out there anda re able to ferret out information that Catalan officers would have difficulty in finding. So why don't we have more? OK, maybe we do as they were not reported as being the first ones in the force, but it's very difficult to find out. It's like asking how many people from Sabadell eat fish on Fridays or how many people in Cornella under 13 have had sex.
What was interesting is that local Arabs were surprised that an Arab woman had become a police officer since she would be moving in a predominantly male environment but seemingly the uniform was the important thing in giving her the respect (DareI say it?) that she all too often does not have not only in the Muslim world but in Spain too. For that matter in the UK as well where gender violence is one of the highest in Europe.
As a footnote to this in Dubai where I worked for many years, a local paper ( The Gulf News) reports that the nunber of complaints to the police about wives beating up husbands has increased enormously in the last five years. The culprits are it seems drugs, alcohol - and western television programmes. Now if they got Spanish TVout there I'd certainly agree with that!
Monday, 21 March 2011
Racism: CEO report suggests 25 % of Catalans could be racist
A recent Government CEO survey showed that one in four Catalans could be termed racist depending on which newspaper you buy for your news. Different papers looked at the stats in a half-empty- glass way but others in a half-full way. Immigration is emotive in Catalunya since many residents believe that much of the street crime is the work of immigrants - and not much is done about it.
According to the results of the survey, people felt positive about immigrants in some respects: they felt that if they had been laid off work they should get unemployment benefit, they should be allowed to keep their customs and traditions (as long as they didn't wear the burka!); they also felt they should be allowed to vote. However certain issues were red-rag status to residents - particularly health and education; many felt immigrants overused the public health service and filled the schools; that the authorities bent over backwards to help them, even depriving native parents' preferences in some areas, in terms of work, people strongly felt that immigrants kept wages low as they were prepared to work for peanuts - some even went as far as saying that immigrants were taking Catalans' jobs.
Sometimes public opinion surveys do more harm than good, especially when newspapers get hold of them and distort the findings for political ends. Clearly however, all is not well on the immigrant front (in a previous blog I mentioned one flagrantly racist politician from Vic who was putting up for election in the government) and there is a lot of rancour out there, clearly expressed in the high percentage of respondents who felt that the city has too many immigrants. It might be interesting to compare Barcelona's with other cities' attitudes though. And to look at things from the immigrants' side too. Will they get the chance to express their feelings publically about living here in surveys like this? Can we also come up with a definition of 'immigrant' too. To some Catalans I've spoken to if you come from Marbella or Cadiz you're classed as one!
According to the results of the survey, people felt positive about immigrants in some respects: they felt that if they had been laid off work they should get unemployment benefit, they should be allowed to keep their customs and traditions (as long as they didn't wear the burka!); they also felt they should be allowed to vote. However certain issues were red-rag status to residents - particularly health and education; many felt immigrants overused the public health service and filled the schools; that the authorities bent over backwards to help them, even depriving native parents' preferences in some areas, in terms of work, people strongly felt that immigrants kept wages low as they were prepared to work for peanuts - some even went as far as saying that immigrants were taking Catalans' jobs.
Sometimes public opinion surveys do more harm than good, especially when newspapers get hold of them and distort the findings for political ends. Clearly however, all is not well on the immigrant front (in a previous blog I mentioned one flagrantly racist politician from Vic who was putting up for election in the government) and there is a lot of rancour out there, clearly expressed in the high percentage of respondents who felt that the city has too many immigrants. It might be interesting to compare Barcelona's with other cities' attitudes though. And to look at things from the immigrants' side too. Will they get the chance to express their feelings publically about living here in surveys like this? Can we also come up with a definition of 'immigrant' too. To some Catalans I've spoken to if you come from Marbella or Cadiz you're classed as one!
Thursday, 10 March 2011
Grounded; Spanish airport strikes again?
The fact there's a financial crisis hasn't made much difference to Spain's trade unions who have just posted their intention to mount a series of airport strikes starting Easter weekend and finishing on the last weekend in August. Well done guys! You've just shrunk our vacations. Not just for those of us who live in the UK but those in the whole of Europe. But then you don't care cos you work for AENA.
This comes hard on the heels of the air traffic controllers' strike which closed Spanish airports and forced the government to arrest the strikers and bring in the military. This strike has been called because AENA which operate all the airports may be partly (49%) sold off to private contractors - whose shareholders will - naturally - insist on airports being run efficiently. The implication is that they are not at the moment? It seems that currently AENAworkers enjoy priveleges (like the air traffic group do) so the fear is probably that some of these will be lost if they have to be more competitive.
Here then is the crux of the matter. In a time of economic crisis people have to compromise like the Civil Service (functionarios) have had to do over pensions, but everytime a different sector is made to do this there are protests and demonstrations. True workers get deserved sympathy as they have bills to pay, like mortgages, based on their current salary. True Spain has 20% unemployment and it desperately doesn't want to increase that figure. But there is a difference between losing your job and losing certain priveleges. On the other hand Spanish workers for long have had better work contracts than many European countries - in some sectors it is virtually impossible to fire workers.
Businesses however have to make a profit (though perhaps not quite so much!) otherwise they go under - and a lot have. Even the flagship of successful enterprises, RyanAir sounded worried. Its director O'Leary this week stated that he'd had to cancel 300 flights during the last strike and the company had lost revenue paid out in compensation to 57 K passengers. Yesterday in Madrid he provocatively called for a clause to be inserted in all European airport worker contracts which made it illegal to strike. Presumeably so that RyanAir planes would not be grounded.
The strike is supported by three unions and today's meeting with government minister Blanco will be a difficult one given recent public statements by both sides. Proposed Easter dates are only 5 weeks away so the meeting will be a muscle-flexing exercise for both sides.The test will be if the government can come up with some kind of compromise without giving in to union pressure using the strikes to hit Spain's already rocky economy.
Footnote: After two meetings of unions with government it seems that the strikes won't after all take place. There is a god after all though it's not sure whose side he was on.
This comes hard on the heels of the air traffic controllers' strike which closed Spanish airports and forced the government to arrest the strikers and bring in the military. This strike has been called because AENA which operate all the airports may be partly (49%) sold off to private contractors - whose shareholders will - naturally - insist on airports being run efficiently. The implication is that they are not at the moment? It seems that currently AENAworkers enjoy priveleges (like the air traffic group do) so the fear is probably that some of these will be lost if they have to be more competitive.
Here then is the crux of the matter. In a time of economic crisis people have to compromise like the Civil Service (functionarios) have had to do over pensions, but everytime a different sector is made to do this there are protests and demonstrations. True workers get deserved sympathy as they have bills to pay, like mortgages, based on their current salary. True Spain has 20% unemployment and it desperately doesn't want to increase that figure. But there is a difference between losing your job and losing certain priveleges. On the other hand Spanish workers for long have had better work contracts than many European countries - in some sectors it is virtually impossible to fire workers.
Businesses however have to make a profit (though perhaps not quite so much!) otherwise they go under - and a lot have. Even the flagship of successful enterprises, RyanAir sounded worried. Its director O'Leary this week stated that he'd had to cancel 300 flights during the last strike and the company had lost revenue paid out in compensation to 57 K passengers. Yesterday in Madrid he provocatively called for a clause to be inserted in all European airport worker contracts which made it illegal to strike. Presumeably so that RyanAir planes would not be grounded.
The strike is supported by three unions and today's meeting with government minister Blanco will be a difficult one given recent public statements by both sides. Proposed Easter dates are only 5 weeks away so the meeting will be a muscle-flexing exercise for both sides.The test will be if the government can come up with some kind of compromise without giving in to union pressure using the strikes to hit Spain's already rocky economy.
Footnote: After two meetings of unions with government it seems that the strikes won't after all take place. There is a god after all though it's not sure whose side he was on.
Monday, 28 February 2011
110 kph speed limit for all
This weekend Prime Minister Zapatero announced - at a height of 35,000 feet closer to heaven than he is normally considered to be - that because of increased oil prices due to the Libyian revolution, there would be a speed limit of 110 kph on all motorways and dual carriageways as from March 7. He might just as well have kicked Catalan Interior Counsellor Felip Puig in the balls (Maybe he intended to?) since the latter had just spent weeks convincing environmentalists and safety organisations that the speed limits around Barcelona on all roads entering the city needed upping to a variable rate. Four days after his changes went into effect, came Madrid's new limit - for the whole country. So there Catalunya!
At times like these as an outsider I fail to understand what a 'Regional Government' is, if the Central one can overule when it likes and what it likes (or in this case doesn't like.) Can someone please tell me exactly what is it that Catalunya can decide for its citizens that can't be overuled.
As I mentioned in a previous blog (Feb 2), Puig in his arguing for the variable rate went against most sane people in Europe (apart from motoring organisations, naturally), so it was interesting to see that Zapatero restated evidence that lower speeds reduce accidents, save money and damage the environment less. Interestingly he also said a variable speed rate would be 'difficult to impose'.
Puig's reaction after this slap in the face was hardly mature. Catalunya, he said, would provide the cheapest covers (plastic stick-on type) for the current 120kph signs, since this limit would be 'only temporary'. He said that he had been considering raising the limit on motoways to 130 kph and doubted that lower limits would save any money. This latter 'pout' was despite the fact savings figures of 1,500 million euros are being bandied around. He also failed to comment on the central government's simultaneous reduction of commuter and middle-distance rail fares by 5% to persuade us to use public transport. Puig mentions that motorists won't like the new limits. Indeed in that respect he may be right - in Barcelona at any rate if La Vanguardia's poll is anything to go by. More than 70% of its readers 'felt the new measures won't save money'. But then the majority of its readers don't support the Government's policies anyway so what's new! Maybe the politicians and everyone else have kicked this particular ball around enough. Can we play another game now?<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.freefoto.com/imagelink/?ffid=21-23-25&s=m" ></script>
At times like these as an outsider I fail to understand what a 'Regional Government' is, if the Central one can overule when it likes and what it likes (or in this case doesn't like.) Can someone please tell me exactly what is it that Catalunya can decide for its citizens that can't be overuled.
As I mentioned in a previous blog (Feb 2), Puig in his arguing for the variable rate went against most sane people in Europe (apart from motoring organisations, naturally), so it was interesting to see that Zapatero restated evidence that lower speeds reduce accidents, save money and damage the environment less. Interestingly he also said a variable speed rate would be 'difficult to impose'.
Puig's reaction after this slap in the face was hardly mature. Catalunya, he said, would provide the cheapest covers (plastic stick-on type) for the current 120kph signs, since this limit would be 'only temporary'. He said that he had been considering raising the limit on motoways to 130 kph and doubted that lower limits would save any money. This latter 'pout' was despite the fact savings figures of 1,500 million euros are being bandied around. He also failed to comment on the central government's simultaneous reduction of commuter and middle-distance rail fares by 5% to persuade us to use public transport. Puig mentions that motorists won't like the new limits. Indeed in that respect he may be right - in Barcelona at any rate if La Vanguardia's poll is anything to go by. More than 70% of its readers 'felt the new measures won't save money'. But then the majority of its readers don't support the Government's policies anyway so what's new! Maybe the politicians and everyone else have kicked this particular ball around enough. Can we play another game now?<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.freefoto.com/imagelink/?ffid=21-23-25&s=m" ></script>
Monday, 21 February 2011
Cycling on the pavement: move over I'm coming through.
After years of invective from motorists and pedestrians, Spain's traffic Authority (the DGT) is to soon permit the arch-criminal from Hell, the cyclist, to ride on pavements at least in places where there are no purpose-made cycling paths.
Praiseworthy though it seems, I can see problems with this initiative. It will mean increased conflict at the pavement level where cyclists already have precious few friends. Cyclists will need to carry a mental tape measure with them since the DGT proposal limits rights of access... to where the pavement is more than 3m wide'. Above all they will need to restrain their current aggressive nature towards pedestians, for example not ride as fast on the pavement as they do on the road. Unfortunately the DGT statement omitted to mention who has priority. Lawyers are already rubbing their hands in anticipation of litigation work for years to come.
The scheme of persuading more of the population to cycle sounds environmentally good but the reality is car drivers, cyclists and pedestrians live together in today's urban society like dogs and cats disputing the same fish or bone. Each lobby feels the others are the criminals, so each is reluctant to give an inch of its conventional territory. As I've mentioned before on this blog, the car driver in particular feels he's king and resents any change in the law that threatens his domination.
Mind you, unlike 'drinking&driving', the 'anti-smoking' and 'wear-your-seat-belt' campaigns worked - well more or less. But only when they were enforced . Is that perhaps the answer here. A big TV/cinema education campaign complete with user norms - and then fine transgressors. Noise pollution next!
Link to map of Barcelona city cycling paths
http://www.bcn.es/bicicleta/docs/mapacarrilbici-OK.pdf
Praiseworthy though it seems, I can see problems with this initiative. It will mean increased conflict at the pavement level where cyclists already have precious few friends. Cyclists will need to carry a mental tape measure with them since the DGT proposal limits rights of access... to where the pavement is more than 3m wide'. Above all they will need to restrain their current aggressive nature towards pedestians, for example not ride as fast on the pavement as they do on the road. Unfortunately the DGT statement omitted to mention who has priority. Lawyers are already rubbing their hands in anticipation of litigation work for years to come.
The scheme of persuading more of the population to cycle sounds environmentally good but the reality is car drivers, cyclists and pedestrians live together in today's urban society like dogs and cats disputing the same fish or bone. Each lobby feels the others are the criminals, so each is reluctant to give an inch of its conventional territory. As I've mentioned before on this blog, the car driver in particular feels he's king and resents any change in the law that threatens his domination.
Mind you, unlike 'drinking&driving', the 'anti-smoking' and 'wear-your-seat-belt' campaigns worked - well more or less. But only when they were enforced . Is that perhaps the answer here. A big TV/cinema education campaign complete with user norms - and then fine transgressors. Noise pollution next!
Link to map of Barcelona city cycling paths
http://www.bcn.es/bicicleta/docs/mapacarrilbici-OK.pdf
Tuesday, 8 February 2011
The price of football: don't let your son go on the pitch, Mrs Worthington!
Football and huge amounts of money have become synonymous: for example the recent transfer of Spanish footballer Fernando Torres from Liverpool to Chelsea for close on 50 million pounds and Gerald Pique, Barcelona defender's four and a half million outlay for his 'attic' on Calle Muntaner in Barcelona. You can see why parents want their kids to be footballers! There's money, real money for the favoured few who make it to the top. Pop-stars and film stars are less-favoured by parents because of their association with anti-social downsides such as drugs and alcohol. Football with its random medical checks, generally displays a clean-living label which appeals to parents. Managers and trainers keep a tight rein on their collection (team) of players and are not so far removed from in locum parentis figures.
However,one of the La Vanguardia journalists, a woman with a young son recently attended a match between two junior teams and was horrified at the supporters - mostly male parents - who vilified the referees' decisions, jeered at the trainer and egged on their offsprings using expressions more fitting to Colosseum crowds in ancient Rome. She found out that some of these 'hooligan' parents are regularly banned from matches for such behaviour.
Naturally this affects the players too. The aim of such games according to schools is to train youngsters in skills and techniques and to let them enjoy exercise. But egged on by parents, they start playing to win, displaying the 'better a winner than a loser be' attitude. And it's winning in whatever way and using whatever tactics. So they ape the worst aspects of professionalism: hold onto jerseys; do ankle taps on opponents in full flight; threaten smaller players and above all constantly dispute decisions - tactics which they see their heroes doing in high-profile matches on TV.
The bookies would say the odds of their little darlings achieving a position on teams of the calibre of Barca are several zillions to one. Barca's catchment area is not Barcelona - nor is the team we see 'made in Barcelona'. Their son is probably more likely to be eaten by a shark than play at Camp Nou, or to commit hari-kari because he doesn't come up to daddy's impossibly high expectations.For many kids all the joy has gone out of playing due to parental-imposed stress on them to win. When did you last see a professional footballer with a grin on his face most of the game - Messi and the Ronaldinho of old apart?
So what is it about today's parents that we try to force our kids into moulds and then wonder why they lock themselves away in their rooms and chat to their friends? And what is the fastest-growing industry in Europe today? Fashion for kids, turning out three year-old Lady Gagas, five year old Penelope Cruz's, Ronaldo ridge-back hairlines. Puyol poodle-cuts. Kids go straight from the cradle to mini-adults and miss out the pram and childhood on the way. All we seem to want are cut- down versions of someone we would like to have been and never had the talent. Is that really the best we can offer?
However,one of the La Vanguardia journalists, a woman with a young son recently attended a match between two junior teams and was horrified at the supporters - mostly male parents - who vilified the referees' decisions, jeered at the trainer and egged on their offsprings using expressions more fitting to Colosseum crowds in ancient Rome. She found out that some of these 'hooligan' parents are regularly banned from matches for such behaviour.
Naturally this affects the players too. The aim of such games according to schools is to train youngsters in skills and techniques and to let them enjoy exercise. But egged on by parents, they start playing to win, displaying the 'better a winner than a loser be' attitude. And it's winning in whatever way and using whatever tactics. So they ape the worst aspects of professionalism: hold onto jerseys; do ankle taps on opponents in full flight; threaten smaller players and above all constantly dispute decisions - tactics which they see their heroes doing in high-profile matches on TV.
The bookies would say the odds of their little darlings achieving a position on teams of the calibre of Barca are several zillions to one. Barca's catchment area is not Barcelona - nor is the team we see 'made in Barcelona'. Their son is probably more likely to be eaten by a shark than play at Camp Nou, or to commit hari-kari because he doesn't come up to daddy's impossibly high expectations.For many kids all the joy has gone out of playing due to parental-imposed stress on them to win. When did you last see a professional footballer with a grin on his face most of the game - Messi and the Ronaldinho of old apart?
So what is it about today's parents that we try to force our kids into moulds and then wonder why they lock themselves away in their rooms and chat to their friends? And what is the fastest-growing industry in Europe today? Fashion for kids, turning out three year-old Lady Gagas, five year old Penelope Cruz's, Ronaldo ridge-back hairlines. Puyol poodle-cuts. Kids go straight from the cradle to mini-adults and miss out the pram and childhood on the way. All we seem to want are cut- down versions of someone we would like to have been and never had the talent. Is that really the best we can offer?
Wednesday, 2 February 2011
Speed limits around Barcelona: a change of heart.
All change on the roads! The new CiU government as by a grinning Arturo Mas has followed up on its electoral promise of doing away with previous tripartite government's sensible 80 kph limit on approach roads into BCN. From March 1st, speed will only be enforced in intense traffic conditions and on roads which join urban 50 kph areas.
The 80 limit was unpopular and bitterly contested by the motorist lobby - mainly by those who insist on driving into work instead of using public transport -and since you might ask, neither car-sharing nor Park-and-Drive are preferred options here. Removal of the limit does seems a bit odd though, especially as the rest of Europe is solidly sold on reducing speed in large conurbations to lower the amount of contamination and accidents. Sound sense. But not in Catalunya, where drivers prefer a head-in-the sand attitude and a you-can't -tell-us-what-to-do approach to life. (It's not as if Franco had blanketed the country with a speed limit like he did with a Catalan language ban is it?) In other parts of Europe you might use epithets like 'stubborn', 'obtuse or 'selfish' to describe such an attitude. Just like opposition to limits on drivers drinking alcohol, or people smoking in a bar. It seems that as soon as you start putting limits on Catalan behaviour - of any kind - sparks start to fly.
Councillor Puig, who has the dubious honour of lifting the 80 limit, flies in the face of all logical argument. His reported arguments deny all scientific research about the amount of pollution that will be produced and he refutes well-documented research showing accidents increase with speed. He knows there isn't enough money around in this cost-cutting government to put up adequate digital signing to inform motorists about speed variations. Instead he insists that common sense will prevail!! In Catalunya on the roads? Does he work from home all the week? Give me a break! Putting Catalans at the wheel of a car is like giving them a lobotomy.
On the other hand all is not bad! DGT, the pan-Spain traffic organisation, have decided to lower the fining tolerance level on motorways from 138 to 135 kph to cut down on accidents. Thus if you are driving at 135 (15 over the limit you now will get fined. Plus100 more radar cameras will be installed to catch speeding motorists. Maybe the people at DGT read the right journals?
The 80 limit was unpopular and bitterly contested by the motorist lobby - mainly by those who insist on driving into work instead of using public transport -and since you might ask, neither car-sharing nor Park-and-Drive are preferred options here. Removal of the limit does seems a bit odd though, especially as the rest of Europe is solidly sold on reducing speed in large conurbations to lower the amount of contamination and accidents. Sound sense. But not in Catalunya, where drivers prefer a head-in-the sand attitude and a you-can't -tell-us-what-to-do approach to life. (It's not as if Franco had blanketed the country with a speed limit like he did with a Catalan language ban is it?) In other parts of Europe you might use epithets like 'stubborn', 'obtuse or 'selfish' to describe such an attitude. Just like opposition to limits on drivers drinking alcohol, or people smoking in a bar. It seems that as soon as you start putting limits on Catalan behaviour - of any kind - sparks start to fly.
Councillor Puig, who has the dubious honour of lifting the 80 limit, flies in the face of all logical argument. His reported arguments deny all scientific research about the amount of pollution that will be produced and he refutes well-documented research showing accidents increase with speed. He knows there isn't enough money around in this cost-cutting government to put up adequate digital signing to inform motorists about speed variations. Instead he insists that common sense will prevail!! In Catalunya on the roads? Does he work from home all the week? Give me a break! Putting Catalans at the wheel of a car is like giving them a lobotomy.
On the other hand all is not bad! DGT, the pan-Spain traffic organisation, have decided to lower the fining tolerance level on motorways from 138 to 135 kph to cut down on accidents. Thus if you are driving at 135 (15 over the limit you now will get fined. Plus100 more radar cameras will be installed to catch speeding motorists. Maybe the people at DGT read the right journals?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)