German economy fuelled by nearly one million immigrants in 2012

Figures reported in the German newspaper Die Zeit give an interesting insight into immigration in Europe’s most powerful economy. Massive immigration is compensating the demographic effects of a falling birth rate. Key points:

965,908 foreigners immigrated into Germany in 2012, mostly from Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and also southern European countries such as Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece, which have been hard hit by their local banking crises. That’s the equivalent of the population of Cologne.

However 578,759 foreigners also left Germany, leaving net immigration of 387,149.

Turks used to flood into Germany, but last year more Turks left Germany than entered, since the thriving Turkish economy offers opportunities at home. Immigration from Islamic countries has become insignificant.

Among German nationals, more left the country than returned.

Because of the declining birth rate, Germany needs net immigration of between 250,000 and 400,000 yearly in order to prevent the population from declining, which would depress economic growth and lead to an ageing population. 200,000 more people die in Germany than are born.

The moral, say Die Zeit, is that this huge immigration is beneficial despite resulting social strains, and Germany should do more to make immigrants welcome.

Meanwhile, in Britain, new legislation is under preparation to make it harder for foreigners to immigrate. We shall see which policy is right …

Malaysia: Elections? What elections?

The ruling UMNO-led coalition has again won Malaysia’s “elections,” but after 57 years in power the process has become something of a charade. The government was declared to have won 133 seats and the anti-corruption opposition led by Anwar Ibrahim 89.

Despite its confidence beforehand, it is hard to see how the opposition could have succeeded. The government monopolises the mainstream media, which refused access to the opposition. Rather than an election campaign, there was thus a monolithic advertising campaign on behalf of the government.

The opposition was reduced to using social media and holding rallies. The latter were constantly disrupted by police mounting road-blocks to delay participants or interrupting proceedings on the grounds there was no “permit.” The opposition campaign bus, fitted out with a collapsible stage because halls were denied to them, was repeatedly vandalised. Under such circumstances, it is hard to see how they could have come out on top.

After 57 years in power, the ruling coalition has inevitably become financially corrupt. Its supporters are those who benefit from the sleaze and the ill-educated in the countryside: a coalition of the corrupt and the ignorant. The opposition has its power base among the well-educated in the major urban centres.

The government’s “election” result is nevertheless its worst ever, and Anwar claimed widespread fraud. There are even suggestions the government won less than half the popular vote. But there seems little for the educated and the open-minded to do except continue biting their nails in frustration. Many opposition supporters blacked out their profiles on Facebook after the results were announced.

Anwar, aged 65, and imprisoned for six years on a spurious pretext, was once a rising star of Malaysia, representing his country as Deputy Premier at the Davos World Economic Forum. Before this latest poll he said he would leave politics if he did not win. Malaysia will be the worse off if he does.

The Surprising Coded Messages Of A Wine Bottle Label

I’m finishing off a bottle of Chénas, printed large on the label. It’s in Gothic script, so I think it’s a long-lived brand and authentic. Moreover it’s “contrôlée.”

Trouble is, I know Chénas is just one of a number of Beaujolais wines, not quite so good (in my opinion) as the Moulin-à-Vent, Fleurie and Juliénas varieties. Bad news anyway: Beaujolais for many people is plonk, so the Beaujolais name gets banished to the top far right corner.

The label next tells us the name of the vineyard where it comes from: Domaine des Pierres. Pierre means stone, and stony ground is good for growing vines. A plus. But a Domaine is not quite a Château, and indeed the picture shows something like a 1970s bungalow.

Trichard is the man responsible, in large letters near the bottom. A down-to-earth peasant-sounding name (though a little close to the French word for cheat – tricheur). Vignéron-récoltant – that is he both tends the vines and harvests the grapes.

His address is not Chénas. Some other wines say they are bottled on the property. This says it’s bottled by the harvester. Maybe he did this where he lives, but maybe also a hundred miles away. Sounds like a sign of authenticity, but it’s not quite.

After all this carping, was the wine good? In my opinion not bad at all, and better than I remember a Chénas some 20 years ago. In that space of time, wine-making techniques have improved, and Monsieur Trichard, maker of this Gothic-titled Chénas, is no exception. But do read the label.

Government decides on media controls in the UK – but they won’t work

In blogs I posted on 23.11.2011and 4.12.1012, I forecast that nothing much would change in the UK media as a result of the Leveson inquiry into journalistic malpractices, triggered by a scandal over popular newspapers hacking mobile telephones.

Leveson has since reported, and the government, backed by the two other major political parties, has decided to set up a supervisory body acting according to criteria set by the politicians. However in practice, much will still continue as before.

The Economist, The Spectator and Private Eye have declared they will not submit themselves to the new body, even though refusal is supposed to expose them to extra-harsh legal penalties if they step out of line. The newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch, as well as the Telegraph and the Daily Mail, have reserved their positions but all likewise indicated opposition.

The new arrangement will be enacted not by legislation, but by Royal Charter. Not having lived in the UK for some time, I’m not sure what a Royal Charter is. However it’s seems obvious that it is weaker than a law, even if the parties insist it will have “statutory underpinning,” another phrase I don’t really understand.

If The Economist will remain outside, that means nothing essential changes for me, since I only actually read The Economist. It earns most of its income outside the UK, so should have no trouble staying out of range of UK controls.

I once lived as a foreign correspondent in Eastern Europe, where the Communist hold over the local media was absolute. People nevertheless found out what was going on through listening to foreign radios. In the UK today, consumers looking for unregulated news can find it on a host of foreign web sites. No need even for a radio set.

In Portugal, during the 1970s revolution, the radical left nationalised nearly all the media, with the result that they all reported the same versions of partial truth. However one newspaper, Espresso, remained independent. So anything that was not favourable to the regime got published there, and we all knew about it. Espresso became the newspaper to read. Controls which are not absolute have no effect.

So does that mean no joy for the victims of mobile phone hackers? Under existing legislation, hacking phones is illegal anyway, so the police could and should do a better job of enforcement.

Some of the media will doubtless remain rascally, but we have got on with that ever since newspapers first appeared. Even if much journalism is rotten, the world can still roll along.

A Change of Regime in Malaysia?

For the first time ever, Malaysia’s dogged and long-suffering opposition believes it has a chance of winning forthcoming elections and forming the next government. The ruling UMNO party will doubtless use the same strong-arm tactics which have kept it in power since independence in 1957. Yet the opposition senses a real chance of winning a majority in Parliament.

On the face of it, the opposition led by former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim (pictured) doesn’t stand a chance. The government controls mainstream media, which unswervingly backs UMNO and denigrates the opposition. Any gathering of more than four people requires a government permit, and these are only sparingly granted to the opposition. Police violently break up unauthorised rallies, and mount road blocks to delay people attending those which are. Thugs from time to time attack people who get through.

Hotels and public buildings refuse to rent space for meetings, and the opposition campaign bus which tours the country with a dismountable stage has been repeatedly vandalised. Dubious legal cases have been brought against many of the opposition leaders, including Anwar himself, who spent six years in jail. Electoral rolls are suspected to be stuffed with phantom voters. On top of that, the economy is not doing badly.

Yet the opposition, which campaigns for an end to the corruption pervading public life after 56 years of one-party rule, believes it has a real possibility of winning. On the last occasion they won 5 of the 13 state parliaments, and for the first time took more than one third of national seats.

Why such optimism? Firstly, they say people are losing their fear of exposing corruption, and scandals are increasingly being aired in public. Civil society is strengthening as NGOs band together. The government’s perennial warnings of political chaos and racial conflict seem to be gradually losing credibility. And the internet provides new media channels which the regime cannot control e.g. http://www.malaysiakini.com/ and http://www.freemalaysia.com/

The prospect is that the slow upswell of liberated grass-roots opinion will erode the well-constructed defences of the ruling party, much as it did in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, and is gradually happening in China and Russia.

Parliament must be dissolved by 27 April. Meanwhile, Anwar and his fellow-leaders criss-cross the country, slipping down back roads to avoid road-blocks, and motor-cycling over rough tracks through palm oil groves. One of them recently started addressing a few dozen people, but after 20 minutes hundreds came trickling out of a distant plantation on foot, swelling his crowd to 2,000.

Coming soon … The Budapest House: Leaving Home, Leaving Your Past

Authors from different countries and writing backgrounds are taking part in an internet project called The Next Big Thing. We’re answering the same 10 questions about a work in progress.

My friend from the Geneva Writers Group, Katie Hayoz, asked me to take part. See her blog http://www.katiehayoz.blogspot.ch featuring Untethered, her YA novel about astral projection.

Here’s what I’m up to:

1) The title?
The Budapest House: Leaving Home, Leaving Your Past

2) Where did the idea come from?
I met the main character of this book through her husband, and her story fascinated and moved me.

3) Genre?
Historical memoir

4) What actors would you choose to play the part of your characters in a film?
Meryl Streep

5) In one sentence: what is the book about?
A Hungarian Jew traumatised by Auschwitz struggles to find her identity on returning to Budapest, where she finds the property she inherited is inhabited by a sinister individual.

6) Will your book be self-published or represented by an agency?
My agent is Lorella Belli.

7) How long did it take you to write the first draft?
Nine months – but I am not on the first draft!

8) What other books would you compare this story to within your genre?
The Hare With Amber Eyes (Edmund de Waal)
Burying the Typewriter (Carmen Bugan)

9) Who or what inspired you to write this book?
I share the main character’s concern over confused identity – it nags at me.

10) What else might pique a reader’s interest?
It’s a poignant story of a person who works through a difficult past and finally leaves her “bad home” to realise herself.

For other authors preparing their Next Big Thing see:

http://www.susantiberghien.com/ - Celebrating Love: Memories from a Long Marriage

http://www.danielanorris.com - On Dragonfly Wings: a Journey to Mediumship

Working hard for A FOOT IN BOTH CAMPS

Attending a weekly lecture on European statesmen, I tell some of the audience I’ve just published a new book A FOOT IN BOTH CAMPS: A GERMAN PAST FOR BETTER AND FOR WORSE. As it happens, I have a few copies in my briefcase.

One woman wants to buy it, “but I just don’t have money with me.” Surprising how many people go out only with change for the bus. When she hears it’s just £7.99, it turns out she can pay, and does! Thank you.

Another woman buys one, and pays on the dot. Her friend says she wants one too, “but I don’t have the money with me.”

“You can share mine when I’ve finished,” says her friend.

“No need!” I cry, sensing the trap. “Here, take one now, I’ll sign it. Give me the money next week.”

Finally, a man sidles up and asks me to sign another copy. Before I can ask, he says: “Second-hand, I’m afraid. Got it from Oxfam.”

I think: it’s only just come out, so that was a quick read, or even worse, perhaps not a read at all. Perish the thought. I sign up cheerfully, glad that Oxfam can make a turn from my writings to care for the downtrodden masses.

Next week, back into the fray with another briefcase of books. It’ll be Helmut Kohl. I’m loving this.

My father died today, at 97 peacefully. Here he is, younger.

Pope’s resignation will re-energise Roman Catholic Church

Pope Benedict XVI at one time admitted that he had no talent for administration or management. That is why he resigned. He saw how the Church already became disorganised in the declining years of Pope John Paul II. But his own qualities lay in theological thought and reflection. Under his reign, there were new gaffes and missteps which a better manager could perhaps have avoided. It is to his credit that he openly recognised his incapacity yesterday and drew the consequences.

The Cardinals are likely to learn the lesson, and choose a new Pope who can get a grip on affairs more effectively. He will doubtless be just as conservative in matters of doctrine, since most of the Cardinals were handpicked by Benedict XVI and his predecessor. But he is likely to be better at managing. The outcome will be dynamising and the Roman Catholic Church may come to appear more modern.

The Church of England just went through the same process. The last Archbishop was a learned and likeable personality, but lost control and his Church suffered. The new Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, is a former oil business executive with experience in finance. He too is clearly expected to be a better manager.

So, Faith is not enough. Material obsessions no, but worldly organisational talents: yes please.

Is a new bubble in risky investments on the way?

As I used to report on the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) as a financial journalist in Switzerland, I remain interested in certain clients it has (they’re all central banks).  Take Argentina for example. It holds nearly all its reserves at the BIS, which is unusual – most other central banks keep about 4%.

Argentina does this because at the BIS its money is protected from attachment by unpaid creditors. I’ll return to this in a later blog.  It’s the subject of arcane arguments in American courts at present. If you look at http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/tag/argentina/, you’ll see what I mean.

Paraguay is another case, and it’s more topical – see my two recent blogs. It holds all its reserves at the BIS, also to protect them from creditors it decided not to pay.

Last week that did not deter a good number of investors from subscribing to Paraguay’s first-ever public international bond issue.  The risk is theirs, you may say. However it does uncannily remind me of the years leading up to the crash of 2008, when banks sold little-explained investment vehicles to gullible investors who did not understand them and asked no questions because of their greed for high yields.

In Paraguay’s case, lead manager Citibank did not inform subscribers in the prospectus that the country keeps all its reserves at the BIS, let alone why. So if the next Paraguayan government repudiates the debt – this has happened several times in the past and the next election is in April – investors were not made aware that a key means of legal redress is blocked.

The ratings agencies were not much put out by this. S&P’s BB- rating and Moody’s Ba3 seem not too bad.

A week before the bond was launched, I myself asked the Paraguayan Finance Minister: “How will you convince potential bondholders that a future Paraguayan Government will not repudiate the bond issue transaction and protect itself from claims by accumulating further funds at the BIS?”

I received no answer, even though the Central Bank had been communicating with me before. Towards the end of last year, Paraguayan ministers were saying in the local media the bond would be launched in mid-February. Now it has popped out just after the New Year. Looks like a rushed job.

Are we at the start of a new cycle of peddling dubious assets which nobody can quite fathom? History shows repentance never lasts more than a few years. I sense the first puffs into a new bubble.