Kortbroek goes probing

News in this morning’s Cape Times that Marthinus Christoffel Johannes van Kortbroek, South African Minister for Tourism has demanded a probe into allegations that some accommodation providers are hiking prices excessively for the World Cup.

“We have noted allegations that accommodation establishments in the tourism industry are not responsible, and are inflating prices excessively,” van Schalkwyk said.

Well done, Marthinus. The rest of us only noticed that fact a few months back. It’s good to see that you and your department have got your collective fingers so firmly on the pulse of what is going to be the biggest tourist event this country has ever seen.
My faith in the Government is restored. Unfortunately.

He said the survey would help safeguard the reputation of the tourism industry since South Africa is known as a “value-for-money destination”.
“Price-hiking could damage the reputation of our tourism industry. However, it must be kept in mind that June and July will be high season in South Africa, and tourists should not expect the normal low-season prices,” he said.

Absolutely correct, Minister. However, nor should tourists expect to pay mark-ups of over 300% as we recently noted at the Ashanti Backpackers Lodge in Gardens.

Grant Thornton has been commissioned to conduct the survey, which is expected to be completed in three weeks.

…leaving the Government with very limited time to do absolutely nothing about it. Meh.

This article prompted me to give Ashanti a call, just to see if they have any rooms left for the World Cup. I didn’t even have to fake a British accent, since I still have half of one of those.
“Plenty,” was the reply.

Goodness me. I wonder why?

Road Closures for State Opening Of Parliament

Following yesterday’s rehearsal for tomorrow’s State Opening of Parliament, the times of the road closures for tomorrow’s State Opening of Parliament have been updated.
Good job they had a practice, then.

Fortunately (as ever), here at 6000 miles… we’re ahead of the curve and we have those updated times available for you right here in handy PDF format.
You don’t need me to tell you to just right click on the link and SAVE TARGET AS:

ParliamentOpeningRoadClosures (PDF, 77kb)

Aside from updating the timing of the road closures, the rehearsal seemed mainly to consist of these guys practicing their formation flying over my house.

They looked to have it pretty much sorted first time around, but just to make sure, they kept it up for another couple of hours until one of them eventually ran out of fuel and dropped out of the sky.

Let’s hope they don’t make the same mistake tomorrow.

Why I don’t believe

The internet is full of weird and wonderful places. Personally, I generally prefer the wonderful to the weird, but it’s often interesting to have a sprinkling of both. One of the weirder elements on the web are the anti-vaccination, 9/11 conspiracy theorist, anti-establishment, Zionist-rule, anti-Global Warming, Big Brother Is Watching You sites.
I’m talking about stuff like infowars.com. Read it and weep. Possibly, anyway.

I – like many (all?) others online – am constantly bombarded by information. That’s fine by me. I love it. But the downside of this information overload is that one has to sort through all that information to find the decent, important, relevant, worthwhile stuff.
Mentally separating the wheat from the chaff, as it were.
When it comes to sites like infowars.com, there seems to be very little middle ground. Either you believe all the stuff that’s on there or you don’t. It’s all either wheaty goodness or chaffy nonsense. That’s a rather blinkered way of looking at things, but I can see why it happens.

I’m a scientist. It says so on my lab coat. And part of my work as a scientist is to look at scientific papers and assess their value. Science uses the peer-review method to assess the value of scientific work. When you do an experiment, you write it up and that write up is sent to several hugely critical scientific bigwigs across the world for them to rip your methods, techniques, writing and entire career to shreds. And they do, because if they let something slip through the net, then it will come back to bite them.
And that doesn’t look good when you are a hugely critical scientific bigwig. Your reputation will be forever sullied.

All of which brings me to the first part of Why I don’t believe the stuff that I read on infowars – a lack of credible scientific evidence. All too often, scratching the surface of their stories reveals inconsistencies and conflicts of interest. The stuff they base their articles on is not peer-reviewed, nor does it comply with mainstream (and therefore proven) scientific principles. And I have studied science long enough (20 years now) to make up my mind on what I believe when it comes to science, thankyouverymuch. I understand the theories and principles behind vaccination. 
And when I find that their version of the stuff I know is incorrect, then why should I believe any of the other articles on the site? For all I know, there are knowledgeable people out there ridiculing infowars’ take on 9/11 or the worldwide economic slowdown.

And there’s another problem. I would/might take some of the stuff on infowars seriously if they didn’t spread themselves quite so widely and therefore quite so thinly. But if I choose to believe that the US used depleted uranium shells in Iraq, then I also have to believe that 9/11 was organised by the US Government and that the MMR jab causes autism. And that doesn’t work for me.  
One can’t just pick and choose certain articles and reports from a news source for their veracity and be willing to disregard the dodgy-sounding others. That doesn’t make sense – either you trust the source or you don’t.
And that’s a little sad, because just maybe infowars and those sort of sites have important messages for us, but they’re lost in a veritable ocean of bullshit.

Next – and closely linked – the fact that they associate with and willingly publish the work of people like David Icke. Too much. Too far fetched. And again –  a huge blow to their credibility.

And then finally, perhaps the most annoying reason – their paranoia. Their arrogance in thinking that they are actually important enough for the government to want to know their every move via CCTV and RFID.
For example, Infowars’ search page doesn’t use google in case the government are watching.
This means that as a search page it’s shit, but at least the CIA don’t know it’s shit.
Unless they’ve tried to use it, obviously.

If you don’t want to travel on the Gautrain because it has CCTV, well that’s your prerogative, but please don’t make a big fuss about it. The rest of us want CCTV there to deter the muggers and the crime, not to see what colour jean pant you chose to wear today. So sure – stick to the roads, but then remember that there’s CCTV there too. How annoying – except if we want to catch those dodging traffic fines or we want to avoid the traffic, of course.
Better then that you stay home and just connect online. But wait –  aren’t the government monitoring all internet connections as well?  Or would believing that bit be a little inconvenient?

Wake up and smell the BS. No-one is bothered about you. No-one gives a toss. Really.

Of course, there will be the counter arguments to this. The ones that run along the lines that I was assimilated by the state education system of a Western government – made to believe their lies.
Or maybe that I’m actually working for the CIA, British Secret Service, Mossad or all three and I’m actually being paid to discredit Alex Jones, David Icke and their cronies and I was connected to Hitler, the assassination of JFK and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan – just like George Bush Snr, who still runs the US.

This is all absolutely true, obviously.
(One time, you can’t believe).

A negative end?

The plan was to end off 2009 as this blog has seen 2009: a look forward with typical realistic optimism to what 2010 has to offer for South Africa.
And then the Mail & Guardian reproduced this little gem from The Guardian in the UK.
It’s one of those opinion pieces which is written with a cheeky gleam in the author’s eye, the well-known “this should prompt a reaction” gleam. It’s not a difficult thing to do: pick an emotive subject, cherry-pick facts to suit your agenda, sprinkle with a couple of disingenuous statements and rely on the reading public not having the knowledge to question them, hit PUBLISH, sit back and watch the sparks fly. Jonathan Steele did it in this case for The Guardian and then Nic Dawes et al picked it up and used the same techniques to keep the M&G website ticking over while everyone should actually have been on the beach.
But no one falls for that sort of trap anymore, do they? So, it didn’t work, did it?
Of course it did:

…written by a Brit, I must point out. Typical whingey, onanistic bluster.

(the full irony of which is fully revealed after this comment on this post)
and:

It amazes me that the Brits have so much to say about SA.
It’s not as if we’re still a colony.

and:

A bunch of whingy Brits have a go at South Africa (see the comments).

Honestly, if you’re going to judge an entire country on the work of one journalist on a slow news day, we’re in trouble. And if you’re going to judge an entire country on the comments on a website news article, then we’re really in trouble. Especially South Africa.
No – much better to judge an entire country on their cricket team, I always say. *ahem*

Moving on to the article itself, it’s actually rather cleverly written, reminding me of that Peter Hitchens one from last March, except that it’s rather cleverly written. There’s no one fact in there that is actually incorrect, but there’s a good deal of careful omission and use of “opinion” to put a negative spin on things. And then there’s the fact that while the title “Why 2010 could be an own goal for the Rainbow Nation” hints towards something about the World Cup going awry, the article is primarily about the supposed failings of the ANC  Government over the last 15 years – and nothing to do with next year at all, save for a passing mention in the first paragraph and a vague assertion that next year will bring further scrutiny on the ruling party. Who knew?

The only moment of positivity I could find in this otherwise one-sided effort was that Jacob Zuma is “more accessible to ordinary South Africans than his aloof predecessor, Thabo Mbeki”, which is hardly much of an earth-shattering epiphany either. And then it’s tempered with a nice dig at everyone’s favourite enemy of the world… er… Nelson Mandela, “who, according to former ministers, could be brutal in cabinet, shutting speakers up by saying he had already taken his decision”.

But from then on in, it’s all doom and gloom; flirting with the full truth on occasion:

Instead of scapegoating the innocent, poor people are aiming their criticism at officials of the ruling party, the African National Congress, and demanding delivery of long-promised improvements. The bad news is that the government and the media seem unwilling to engage in serious debate, let alone action, on how to supply people with what they need.

hiding behind the author’s own prejudices opinion:

South Africa’s press and blog sites are dominated by rightwing thinking. They regularly headline claims that the government is “lurching to the left” and that the Communist party and trade union allies are getting the upper hand.

and being downright disingenuous with others:

Zuma was unlucky to come to power just after the onset of the global economic crisis. Growth in 2010 is projected to fall by 2.6% at a time when western economies are already reviving.

I don’t think that Zuma doubts that South Africa has problems. Nor do I think that he is afraid to stand up and face them or those who rightfully demand service delivery. The trouble is that for every township that riots, there are another [large number] that also face exactly the same problems. Apartheid left a huge wound on South Africa which is going to take many decades to heal. To expect everything to be sorted out already is laughable: these people are politicians – they are just human beings.
South Africa is going the right way – but too slowly. Zuma’s task is to speed up that change.
How? I don’t know. I’m a microbiologist. But I will suggest that if anyone had a magic wand, they surely would have waved it by now.

I felt sure that I was going to disagree with Steele about his view of South Africa’s prospects in 2010. But if the only conclusion he comes to is that “The spotlight on the country’s progress since apartheid will be more intense than ever”, well then maybe I agree. But I do think it will stand up to that spotlight.
It’s all very well talking of an (unreferenced) average class size of 50: 15 years ago, there weren’t even any classrooms.
It’s all very well talking of the “brutal” police service: what were they doing pre-1994?
And yes, the people are now turning to the justice system to bring change: how is that not progress?

Next year promises to be huge for this country. With the FIFA World Cup comes a massive opportunity to showcase what South Africa has to offer. I’ve said before that there will be dissent; that there will be articles (like Steele’s) which will seek to derail the occasion and pounce on every little error or problem. But we don’t have to live our lives like that.
It should be a year of progress – not by overlooking the problems, but by tackling them.
It should be a year of celebration – enjoying the successes and learning from the failures.

South Africa isn’t perfect. Nowhere is perfect.
But in 2010, SA is going to shine.

Happy New Year.