Simon.

I took the photos above of Erith Pier a couple of years ago, before I was housebound. As I have written on several occasions in the past, the pier is a very pleasant and peaceful place to visit, especially when the weather is nice. It is the only place in the London Borough of Bexley where you can clearly see from horizon to horizon, and is home to what is termed as the Erith big sky. Unfortunately, over the last few days, the peaceful nature of the pier has been disrupted by some very thoughtless and selfish people. I have had reports from a couple of regular readers that when they visited Erith Pier recently, a number of other visitors were playing very loud music, drinking strong alcohol from cans and acting in an antisocial manner. Historically, there have been a small group of three or four street drinkers who usually occupy the Pier Gardens or sometimes the Riverside Gardens. It would appear that the recent antisocial behaviour was not from these rather elderly people, but from younger males who were stripped to the waist and preparing themselves for a nasty case of sunburn. I have been told that these individuals acted in a somewhat aggressive and threatening manner which could easily put off regular law abiding visitors. This is a real pity as Erith Pier is a usually under used local attraction, and something that the town town needs to be proud of.Comments to me at hugh.neal@gmail.com.

Back in September last year I wrote a piece on the the proposed introduction of a digital identification system by the government. Historically, I had a small level involvement with the last proposal of this type, approximately two decades ago, which was promptly abandoned. I wrote about it saying:- "I have somewhat of a unique angle on this story, as I was indirectly involved with the previous attempt to introduce a government ID scheme almost exactly 20 years ago. I thought that my perspective on this might prove informative. The aim is not to suggest the positives or negatives of the concept of an ID card within the UK, merely that the practicalities of introducing such a system without careful consideration and very methodical management could result in a chaotic, unsuccessful and very expensive deployment. Back during the last time the subject was broached in detail. I was working for a very large multinational accountancy and consultancy partnership, which was one of the number of organisations hired by the government in order to research the subject to look into the practicalities of deploying it, and the the technicalities and costs associated with administering it. I was not personally involved in any great detail, but I knew several people very involved in the project. I was told off the record (as there were huge consultancy fees involved) that a national ID card in the format the government was proposing was impractical and hugely expensive to deploy and likely to fail, citing a number of the criteria set for judging success. Several other countries, including the Netherlands and Estonia, have deployed digital personal IDs to their citizens, but their methodology was far different from that suggested for a UK deployment. In fact, one very senior person involved in the 2005 - 2006 feasibility study told me in a quiet and confidential chat over a cup of tea that the project was fundamentally flawed. The government wished it to be rolled out in a particular form, but it was never going to work. It would be exceedingly expensive, difficult to monitor and even harder to administer and likely to be the subject of widespread identity theft and financial fraud". Last week my prediction came true. A report published last week by the Home Affairs Committee of Parliament concluded that the government's handling of the proposed digital ID scheme was "rushed, poorly thought out, and failed to make a convincing case". It also said that public confidence in the scheme had been undermined by the rushed and inadequate announcements that had been made. It also warned that no rigorous policy development and no public consultation was made ahead of the announcement of this project. Apparently, ministers were unable to answer basic questions about privacy, how the scheme would be implemented, how personal data would be protected, and how the system would operate if put into place. The committee also advised that the mandatory ID card proposal "came out of the blue, causing alarm and uncertainty, and the government's inherent approach to policy development cannot be repeated if public trust is to be rebuilt". Chair of the Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee, Dame Karen Bradley was dismissive of the government's early efforts in this respect and described them as "nothing short of a fiasco - to the public. This announcement came out of the blue and made little sense". It seems that the entire project may well be kicked into the long grass in the near future. It is a political hot potato, and national governments of whichever party in the UK have a very poor record when it comes to large-scale public sector IT projects. This is precisely what I predicted back in September of last year. 

The photo above shows Erith railway station in the Spring of 1969, with a train waiting at the Dartford bound platform. What strikes me about the historic photo is how much more industrialised Erith was back then. A photograph taken from the same location now would show a far more residential environment in the background. A fascinating glimpse of the not so distant past.

Unfortunately, there has been another serious incident involving an illegal e-scooter. A 21-year-old man was killed after colliding with a fire engine on its way to an emergency call. The incident happened on the 25th of May at around 10:45 p.m near the junction of Princes Road and Darenth Road in Dartford. Precise details of the case are unclear, and the incident is still be investigated by the police and the fire service. What is clear is that only e-scooters which are hired from certain registered and recognised companies are legal to operate in public. No such scheme is operating in either the London Borough of Bexley or Dartford Borough. All privately owned e-scooters can only be legally used on private land such as back gardens - with the consent of the owner. Many of the e-scooters are capable of very rapid acceleration and high top speeds. They are almost completely silent, and as I know from personal experience, when I was hit from behind by an e-scooter some years ago; they can cause damage equivalent to being hit by a car. I was fortunate that I suffered only a couple of cracked ribs and extensive bruising, but other people have not been so lucky. The drivers of emergency service vehicles, including fire engines, ambulances and police cars undergo extensive training prior to being permitted to drive as part of their duties. E-scooter riders have no such training, and often operate their vehicles with little concern for third parties. As previously mentioned, I am not certain of the circumstances of the collision that ended up with the death of the e-scooter rider in Dartford last week, but it must be great concern to everybody involved. Let me make it clear that I'm not completely against e-scooters, in fact when used responsibly they can be very useful for short journeys, but I feel that a system of compulsory training and examination, along with a registration scheme, and proper insurance needs to be established. At present it seems that the last couple of governments have been wary of involving themselves in any kind of regulation scheme. I feel that this needs to change.

There is a common misconception that the modern smartphone was invented by Apple, with the launch of the first iPhone in January 2007. This is actually incorrect, although somewhat understandable, as its predecessor was far less successful and even less well known. This year actually marks the  thirty second  birthday of the smart phone – though the actual term was not coined until several years later. The IBM Simon was a (then) revolutionary mix of a GSM mobile phone with a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant). In addition to its ability to make and receive cellular phone calls, Simon was also able to send and receive faxes, e-mails and cellular pages. Simon featured many applications including an address book, calendar, appointment scheduler, calculator, world time clock, electronic notepad, handwritten annotations and standard and predictive stylus input screen keyboards. All this is run of the mill now, but was mind – boggling stuff back in the day. Surprisingly the Simon did not sell very well. Part of this was the price – it cost a lot. In the USA, BellSouth Cellular initially offered the Simon throughout its 15 state service area for US$899 with a two-year service contract or US$1099 without a contract. A not inconsiderable sum, on top of which were the call and data charges. If this was not enough, the initial production run of the Simon was plagued by software bugs – not surprising in a brand new concept that was arguably rolled out to the retail market before it was fully mature. A few Simon units were used by IBM UK executives, but it was not a phone that ever went on general release in the UK – at the time it was thought that there would be insufficient market for such a device. In the end, only around fifty thousand IBM Simon phones were sold, and the product was eventually withdrawn from sale six months after release. Nevertheless, it was the pioneering device in what has now become a multi-billion dollar worldwide industry.

Over the last few months, I have written quite extensively about the problems being experienced by the Morrisons supermarket chain. They seem to originate principally from the fact that they are owned and managed by an American private equity group, who have settled the supermarket chain with a huge amount of debt, which they are trying to service. Morrisons hit another problem last week, when it was announced that they had dropped from 5th to 6th largest supermarket in the UK, being overtaken by Lidl. Last year they dropped from 4th to 5th after being overtaken by Aldi. Now they are firmly at the bottom of the premier league of UK supermarkets, and their market share is decreasing steadily. Lidl plan to open another 50 stores around the UK over the next year, and Aldi are now threatening Asda for the number three position. Both of the German discount stores are expanding rapidly, I believe this is due to a combination of very competitive prices, good quality products and convenient store locations. I also understand that the level of staff satisfaction at both Aldi and Lidl is high, with very good working conditions, and pay which is markedly higher than their competitors in the same industry. Number one largest supermarket chain is Tesco and number two is Sainsbury's, both of whom have held their positions for a considerable time. What is interesting to note is that the supermarket chains that are declining rapidly - that is Asda and Morrisons - are both owned and run by private equity firms, and have huge levels of debt imposed on them. It seems to me that as soon as a private equity firm purchases a UK High Street company, for example WH Smith, it is the kiss of death to them. The private equity firms saddle High Street companies with huge levels of debt, then appear to asset strip them, selling off store locations and intellectual property in order to make a fast buck. 

Back in February, I wrote at some length about a very short-lived hovercraft bus service which ran on the River Thames during the summer of 1963. More recently popular specialist transport YouTuber Jago Hazzard has published a short video documentary on the hovercraft service, and why it failed. The video is only around 8 minutes long, and I would highly recommend it. Comments and feedback to me at the usual address - hugh.neal@gmail.com.