Maybe up a stream, and far away, onto someone’s plate, but those ‘air miles’ don’t count for the kind of prestige a fish might want in its native stream.
It’s a different matter entirely when people are out on the hunt, however, and want more from life – and the life around them.
This is where salmon lose their footing, of course.
In recent times, the salmon at Fortnum & Mason have come under their own criticism, as well.
Salmon fishing at Fortnum & Mason
Far from a river, and far from their habitat, they also have an indignity levelled over their implicit quality.
The Daily Mail reported a story recently about its fish being questioned at the store in Piccadilly, over their heritage.
It seems odd, to bring it up like that, but people want their facts (and a decent dinner, too!), so they’ll go extra lengths find out whatever it is they need to know.
It raises issues over everyday items that we’re used to; where they come from, and what to expect, now that the law is more aware of these things.
This is the stuff of shopping, after all, and of normal, everyday living.
The law can’t ignore it.
There’s nothing to stop an average fish-loving man, partial for a bit of salmon, from asking a few questions, and making a few inquiries about it.
It keeps our salmon the best it can be, and makes our shopping experience easier, too.
A telling point about today is that it is indeed different from the past.
It’s difficult for us not to argue this, if the argument needs to be made, although, there is a lot still present that speaks of our past.
There is a bit of a misnomer about trying to define things, as if more things need to be said.
It’s pretty clear what some believe by what they say, do, and, how they respond to what goes on.
After a while, their reactions become second nature, almost.
I am in no doubt how a developing story will affect the worldview – or narrative – of certain politicians; in absolutely no way, whatsoever. It’s not given to them to disagree with something that seems to affirm their worldview, or give in to a point that seems to contradict it, either,
This is the case also with conservatives, who tend to stick to what they know, and ignore whatever they find contradicts their worldview.
This is common in politics, when you’re trying to make an argument.
It may be a politician has a point to prove, to a committee, or to another politician, or even a book to sell, and so on. In fact, their contributions in private and public dialogue will reflect this because it’s their politics as a politician.
It’s not a case of a national debate, but ongoing point-scoring and rebuttal, that can make up the transitory career of someone trying to make a difference in life.
If they are successful, or not, is another matter.
I don’t think conservatism is ‘stuck in the past’, but it does have its own historic arguments to make, in response to overt triggering and point-scoring by leftists, who want to bring up all the old debates but without the lessons of the past.
It’s not that conservatism has all the right answers, either. Yet, it has a presence, here, particularly when these issues mattered last time around. It proves that longevity has its benefits, still.
While the ‘new’ and ‘improved’ struggles to fit in, other conservatives may look back in history for answers, as they too struggle over the same issues.
I was travelling in on a train today, and I questioned if a construction site I saw was anything to do with HS2, perhaps Britain’s most feted construction project to date.
It wasn’t clear if it was, but anyhow, it made me question it, and I guess that means HS2 is indeed a major topic, and it’s worth questioning it myself, in light of larger concerns about transport across the UK.
It’s something I use, after all.
It’s important to me because I use it so often, and for so many different reasons, that it’s also important to me that it’s there, and keeps running well, on time, and when I need it (that’s the purpose of public transport, after all).
It isn’t clear, though, that everyone has these thoughts in mind.
It seems like travel isn’t seen as so important as it is, to all of us, such as the annual ‘horror’ over passport delays, flight cancellations, and resultant ruined holidays.
It’s just a mess, if you ask me, but not if you use it. In my view, public transport works well, if you’re headed in the right direction.
It’s what public transport is for, also, in so much as getting us to the right places in a convenient, and acceptable, way.
Those places are the places that require us, need investment, and make this country tick, such as London, for example – our capital.
It’s the heart and soul of the nation, and it’s a centre of most of what keeps us here.
The transport links are good – even excellent – but the complaints center around the experience while you’re here.
Take for example the controversy over Ulez, a new system for penalising drivers because of ‘climate change’.
It hasn’t gone down well, at all, which is a reason why so many have taken to the streets – and YouTube – to spread their complaints over the mayoralty of Sadiq Khan, and his program of reform of London’s roads.
It isn’t a bad thing to tackle climate change, or air pollution for that matter, but it’s another pain in the bum for people who just want to get on, or just get to work, or whatever.
It isn’t necessary to get another bill, surely?
The complaints don’t stop there, but they extend to buses, underground services, and even taxi’s (which Khan seems to have a problem with, anyway).
This is all a bit of a mess, but then that’s public transport for you.
Westminster culture is one thing to observe, but not, perhaps, as a tourist.
It doesn’t behove many people to enjoy the political ‘culture’ that any nation has, as if politics is enjoyable, or produces moments that are as sublime as our own, in our own lives, that we make with each other.
I suppose any job produces its ‘highlights’ that go down in the history of the office as worth having had, and pockmarking the banal moments and the boring periods worth forgetting is important to keeping things going, in other words.
I suppose Westminster has its own way of marking ‘events’, or moments to cover epochs of its own it would rather forget. It isn’t necessarily easy to make decisions for other people, as if it goes down well that some win, and some loose out.
Imagine this happens hundreds of times a year, and you get the point. People are not happy with the way things are for them, according to their ‘scorecard of democracy’, so to speak, and it gets worse as other people have their time to speak and make a louder noise as a result.
This is gruelling stuff, surely. So, it makes sense to have to deal with it in other ways, in having and enjoying lighter moments, such as this pub I’m in, in Westminster, called St. Stephen’s Tavern.
It’s a small pub, but it sits in a very busy corner of Westminster, and must have seen its fair share of ‘interesting’ characters, both foreign and domestic, who wanted to make their mark on a visit, a tour, or an excursion during lunch, in a pub.
I can imagine it’s worth stopping by in, on a day when work is little more pressing, but then, Westminster has its own bars inside its own walls, so it’s not compulsory. It’s just a part of the way we do things here, as well in other places, but very much our own, too.
The centre of gravity of English politics, Westminster in London, that is, shapes itself as a welcoming and transparent place.
It looks endearing, almost teddy bear-like, and stands erect if lonely in a sea of other buildings and meanings.
It’s a friend of the city, but pretty well damn friendless, as well. This isn’t a situation that can last, surely?
It’s meant in a way that marks out some significant differences between “now, and then” so to speak, which is a dangerous game in a place that marks itself out now as being so much more than what it was – in its heyday.
It’s the same with many of the buildings and monuments that make up a nation’s “public library”, in that it has something very specific to say, but not a lot hear it.
If you take for example the recent Gaza protests that beset that part of the city, it becomes clear.
It’s a ‘thing’ nowadays to see ‘taking your cause’ or representation as being a constant, gradual process that doesn’t involve the usual democratic process, but one of your own making (and thatis own).
It’s not a point for MP’s to make for us – salaried as they are – but rather it’s seen as a cause to get on with by ourselves, or by themselves, as the case may be.
This isn’t an acceptable or safe way of doing things in a business-like state, especially when those active in protests are unvetted, and therefore present a risk (as they have done) because of their slogans, but also because of their often antisemitic beliefs.
The Palace of Westminster therefore has a difficult place in our modern history, as it stacks up its rebukes from the people sky-high and struggles to overcome its difficulties and differences with all hues of people. It seems as if it can’t win, whatever it does.
How does such a venerated institution reach a state like this? What is its answer to its own problem of not only aiding it, but abetting such activity, as well?
Ingenuity meets business and what do you have? Office space. It’s not the most interesting of subjects to talk about, and if it’s over a pint, it probably won’t come up as a sticking point for many of us. Indeed, it’s just a bit of a misnomer.
Not in London, that is.
You would be forgiven for thinking this is a settled issue. For centuries, businesses and industries have had some kind of presence in England’s historic capital; it’s been the centre of some remarkable, if controversial, trading companies, stock-and-shares icons, and a few trouble makers, too. There is plenty of space, and plenty of room for more, because of this historic legacy of administrative space-making warfare that we’ve waged for quite some time, in fact.
Indeed, this lust for more power has not abated, and up have risen tower after tower, symbolising we-don’t-quite-know-what at the same time as welfarism, and the State, which seems hell bent on making itself known as the breadwinner in British politics (even the funny names for these skyscrapers don’t give much away as to their purpose).
Take for example the new development of ‘Paddington Central’, in central London. It’s not in a nondescript, far-flung place, but it is largely – if not by majority – empty. I’ve taken a look myself, and apart from some statement buildings at the front of the development, and a few more tucked away, there’s not much else to it, and it’s just Visa that seems to have a presence anywhere, there (take a look at the photos).
A ‘Paddington Central’ signage station A look up a walkway as office workers leaveA view of an empty floor at ‘3 Sheldon Square,Workmen putting in finishing touches
This is a strange sight, but not an uncommon question to beg, in 21st century London. Yes, it’s pricy land, but it’s our land, and what’s being built on it is private property. In fact, it’s commercial private property, and yet it’s lying fallow without much intent behind it. Is there a reason for this unoccupied space, or is office space more of an art or a technique than I realised?
If you take a look around, it’s an odd mix of buildings, or use of space. A few outlets you might recognise, such as Pret A Manger and Gregg’s bakery, and then a really upmarket restaurant tucked right at the back of the development, hardly visible to anyone (there isn’t a passageway direct to it, apart from beside a hotel, nearby, I think).
Apart from that, I noticed plenty of office space but not much usefulness to the site, obviously that is (there’s an art installation, but it’s looking tired already).
I wonder what all these developments are for, when the footfall is so low, in business terms, and there’s a lack of harmony in regard to the choice and layout of these places. In my opinion, it doesn’t seem clear if even Visa know what they’re doing there. I would have expected a payments company to site themselves in a finance cluster, not a half-full ‘spot’ in Paddington, somewhere.
In the rush to build up, what are we getting in return for this private investment? Probably not a lot, as yet (I’ve got a Gregg’s nearby, some might say). The jobs are high-end, and the work environments demand a lot (it’s not a matter of a run-of-the-mill job).
The problem with London is that it sees itself too highly, and it builds to compete with itself, rather than other places, where the focus is on home-grown industries, and a sense of rightness with its own goals, and aspirations. If we have a problem, it’s knowing what business is, here, not knowing where to put it.
This site is here for a dedicated destination in terms of news that matters to those interested in conservative politics, around the world.
My terms of ‘conservative’ are not limited to one nation or background, but have a broad view in mind to create a worldview that is enhanced by all the institutions that make up our political lives, not just the local democratic processes we enjoy.
In today’s political climate, there is no better time to start to make sense of a disassembled and diverse but ill-defined way of life and thinking that is shaping political narratives, and helping a more centric way of politics to emerge.
ConservativeNewsSite.com isn’t seeking to change the narrative or highlight out of preference, but to draw out the significant facts and figures and illustrate their importance in the way things are done.
