Taking offence

Has it ever occurred to you that whether or not you are offended by something I say or write is entirely dependent on what you think of me, not on what I actually said or wrote?

If your best friend says to you “F@*k off, you stupid wa#$er”, the chances are you will interpret it as banter and laugh.  If a stranger said it you’d be annoyed.

The current US Presidential campaign is a case in point.  Both sides keep throwing out ‘information’ about their opponent that is designed to make the opponent seem unelectable, but the only people who actually find it so are those who weren’t going to vote for the opponent anyway.  The Trump Campaign could accuse Hilary of murdering babies (for all I know, they already have) and the only people impressed would be the existing Trump supporters.  How people take what they hear is entirely dependent on what they believed about the speaker before they heard it.

This is particularly true on Facebook.  You are quite possibly ‘friends’ with people who are not really your friend.  If somebody you like makes a dubious post you are less likely to hit back with a damning riposte than if it’s someone with whom you actually have a positive relationship.  This perhaps explains why there is so much anger in Facebook!

So next time you hear or read something and find yourself feeling offended, don’t focus on what was actually said or written – think instead about the person saying or writing it.  Why don’t you like that person?  Have they done something in the past to hurt you, or someone close to you?  Or is it just that you don’t really know them at all?  Consider this before you leap to your keyboard or open your mouth and maybe you will decide that it isn’t worth the effort of hitting back against someone who isn’t worth the investment or your time.  Then we can all save ourselves a lot of anger.

Maybe I shall try to follow my own advice, here!

TC Post holders going on training

There has been a lot of ill-informed comment recently, along the lines that TC Post holders come here presumably qualified to do the job they are appointed to, so why do they then “go off on training”, usually at the taxpayer’s expense?

I can provide an answer.

Most TC Post holders will be members of Professional Bodies.  There are many such bodies and they cover most professions.  Being a member of your relevant Professional Body acts as a sort of quality guarantee for anyone seeking to employ you – s/he must be OK or the Professional Body would have kicked him/her out (usually, though not always true) – and it also through networking helps the person find future work.  If a TC Post holder comes here they will wish to keep up their membership of their Professional Body, so they can more easily find work when their contract is over and they leave St Helena.

However, remaining a member of your Professional Body has two ‘costs’. There is usually an annual fee, of course, but more importantly there is an annual requirement to continuously refresh your knowledge in your filed. CPD, it’s usually called – Continuing Professional Development.  The reason for this requirement is simple and entirely justified.  There are few professions where knowledge and best-practice do not develop over time.  Imagine being seen by a Doctor who didn’t know about the new treatments introduced since s/he qualified 20 years ago?  CPD is helpful to the individual’s employers/clients, and a minimum amount of CPD is usually required by the Professional Body.

In some Professional Bodies, the CPD can be achieved online, using the Internet, but some require you to physically attend conferences and lectures.  This cannot be achieved without leaving St Helena.

No member of a Professional Body will accept a job here if it means they will fail to meet their CPD requirement, and hence lose their membership.  And we really shouldn’t be employing people who aren’t good enough to be members of the relevant Professional Body.  So “time of for training” will always be necessary for some of our TC Post holders.  Who pays for it is simply a contract issue - either SHG pays, or the person will require more salary to cover the costs.

By the way, I lost my membership of the Institute of Management when I moved to St Helena, because I wasn't working for SHG and could not personally afford the trips to the UK to meet that body’s CPD requirements.

CT4SH (Cape Town for St. Helena)

If you agree with the following, please 'like' the Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/CT4SH/

I submitted the following letter to both newspapers this week:

Dear Sir,

The delay in the opening of our airport to commercial flights gives us an opportunity to re-visit one of the bad decisions made in the haste to rush air access into being for May 2016.  And this one has got nothing to do with wind or runway alignment.  I’m talking about the decision to route our primary air service to Johannesburg, rather than Cape Town.

Cape Town has been St. Helena’s point of entry on the African continent since the British seized it^{[i.e. the Cape]} from the Dutch in 1806 - around two hundred years ago.  The British Empire ships, Union Castle Line and both the first and second RMS St. Helenas all called there.  It is familiar territory for Saints.  Many Saints have relatives living in and around Cape Town and there is a comprehensive infrastructure for welcoming and supporting visiting Saints, whether on route to the rest of the world or on medical.  None of this exists in Johannesburg.  Johannesburg, for Saints, is as alien as Kabul (and possibly nearly as dangerous).  Cape Town has a much lower crime rate than Johannesburg.  For Saints, the only sensible choice is to run flights to Cape Town.

We are told that the international tour operators charged with bringing the supposed 30,000 tourists per annum to St. Helena and thereby saving our economy, removing our dependency on the UK for financial support and making us all rich, prefer Johannesburg.  Their preference would seem to have been the reason, possibly the only reason, behind the Johannesburg decision.  But let’s examine this more closely.

Yes, Johannesburg airport has lots of international connections, but so does Cape Town. You can fly daily between Cape Town and both London and Frankfurt, two of Europe’s biggest hubs, and there are regular flights from Cape Town to many other world destinations, moving nearly 10 million passengers per annum.  Cape Town is South Africa’s second largest airport; not quite as big as Johannesburg, but not small either.

And aren’t the majority of these tourists supposed to be coming from South Africa anyway?  Isn’t that why direct flights to Europe were abandoned in favour of the South African hub?  To a South African, Cape Town or Johannesburg makes very little difference.  If you live closer to Johannesburg, there are cheap, frequent shuttle flights to Cape Town or even the train.  Nobody is going to refuse to visit St. Helena simply because they have to fly from Cape Town rather than Johannesburg.  The Johannesburg decision simply does not add up.

With a rumoured three-year delay in opening the airport for commercial flights the existing contract with Comair must be all but dead and should not handicap our thinking.  There is plenty of time to set up a new contract with a more sensible African destination.

The rationale for selecting Johannesburg was, frankly, as faulty as the airport’s runway layout.  Our Government can do little about the latter but the former is definitely within its grasp.  Let’s think again – and choose Cape Town.

Yours sincerely,

John Turner, Frith’s Cottage, Napoleon St.

Here are a few other relevant facts:

• The Cape Town International Airport was among the winners of the World Travel Awards for being Africa's leading airport. [Wikipedia]
• Cape Town International Airport recently opened a brand new central terminal building that was developed to handle an expected increase in air traffic as tourism numbers increased in the lead-up to the 2010 FIFA World Cup. Other renovations include several large new parking garages, a revamped domestic departure terminal, a new Bus Rapid Transit system station and a new double-decker road system. The airport's cargo facilities are also being expanded and several large empty lots are being developed into office space and hotels. [Wikipedia]
• Cape Town is one of the most multicultural cities in the world, reflecting its role as a major destination for immigrants and expatriates to South Africa. [Wikipedia]
• Cape Town is not only the most popular international tourist destination in South Africa, but Africa as a whole. This is due to its good climate, natural setting, and well-developed infrastructure. [Wikipedia]
• In November 2013, Cape Town was voted the best global city in The Daily Telegraph's annual Travel Awards. [Wikipedia]