Welcome, everybody, to the planning of a cherry tree which symbolizes the relationship between Portland and Shinagawa, Japan. This is a 30-year sister-city relationship, and thanks to the vision of our mayor. And we are grateful to Portland Parks for this wonderful cherry tree which is planted here in Tommy's post office plaza, and hopefully as this cherry tree continues to grow, the relationship with Portland and Shinagawa will mirror that and continue to grow as well. And we are very honored to be part of this tree planting ceremony. To make this cycle come to fruition, we'll start by having our original mayor, when I say original mayor, back in 1984, David Brenerman was mayor of Portland, and he signed the original sister-city relationship into being, and as a result, the fruits of his vision and the vision of Shinagawa mayor, Aitur Otaga, have come full circle. And so, without further ado, I'd like to welcome David Brenerman, the mayor who signed the sister-city relationship into being 30 years ago. Thanks, Jeff. When we signed the sister-city relationship 30 years ago, as Jeff said, I had the great honor and fortune to be mayor of Portland, and we commenced the relationship because in some small way, we wanted to contribute to world peace and understanding. And as many of us have been to Japan, and a number of Japanese citizens have been to Portland of all different walks of life, I think that we've had greater understanding of each other. Mayor Brennan was able to lead a delegation to celebrate the 30th anniversary. A number of former mayors have been to Shinagawa, and of course, mayors of Shinagawa have been here as well as other citizens, children, people of different professions. And so, it is a great thing that we are dedicating this planting of a tree today, and I want to introduce Mayor Michael Brennan to continue this tradition and say a few words. Mayor Brennan. Thank you, former mayor Brenerman. And what I'd like to do is invite up former city manager Joe Gray and former mayor Ann Pringle, and we're going to do a toast. So, and to Mayor Havana, who hopefully will get to see this, and Jeff? Yep. Okay. So, this is a thank you for the 30-year sister city relationship that we've had with Shinagawa and Portland, and this is a toast and recognition of that 30-year anniversary and continued many years of goodwill, peace, and friendship between our two cities. Here, here. We should mention that this is cherry juice in keeping with the cherry tree behind us, and Joe, would you hold this for a second? We would like to, on behalf of friends of Shinagawa, present Mayor Brennan with a Portland Shinagawa t-shirt, and this is our thanks for the mayor's vision and the mayor's actions to continue this relationship that has benefited the citizens of both Portland and Shinagawa all these years. So, on behalf of friends of Shinagawa, Mayor Brennan, enjoy. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it, Jeff. And I accept it on behalf of all everybody that went on the trip to Shinagawa, the delegation. It was a terrific group of people, and we all got along well for extended periods of time that we spent with each other. And what I'd like to say just very quickly, when I was in Shinagawa and I spoke, I talked about the importance of planning this cherry tree, symbolizing our friendship and continued relationship with the city of Shinagawa. And I noted the fact that it was my hope that my granddaughter would be able to come and see the cherry tree and to understand that, even though she hadn't been to Japan yet, that we had all gone to visit, yes, Ariza, and recognize that she had friends throughout the world as a result of the first relationship that David established back in 1984. And I just recently came across the saying, and I thought this was great and very apropos for today, but they said the sign of a civilized society is when older people plant trees knowing they will never sit in the shade of those trees. So I hope every one of us has the opportunity to sit in the shade of this tree. But I also hope that many generations and many people of all ages will come and benefit from the shade of this tree. Daniela, thank you for bringing Ariza today. We appreciate it. Daniela is a biologist, so she really understands the importance of trees. But very quickly, Jeff, I'd like you to come up and explain a little bit more about the history of the tree as well as what you just mentioned about the Four River and Yeah, sure. Thank you. I'm Jeff Tarling, the City Arborist in Portland, and the Post Office Park has a long history of a lot of effort from the community to become a park. In 1992, a committee was formed. We talked about design attributes and really thought about the sister city program. And that this brickway that you're walking on, standing on, represents the Four River flowing down to the islands of Casco Bay. The Japanese mailboxes, the antique mailboxes, have been a real focal point of this park. I know former mayor Esther Klennett always reminded me of how important it was to have the right color. So we want to make sure that the mailboxes look good. But the cherry tree we're planting today is a Sargent Cherry. It's a cultivar called Acolyde. And cherry trees in Portland, in the early 90s, we only had a few down on Commercial Street. We saw how well they did, and what it did for people's spirit in the spring when they bloom. And so we've prospered that idea and continued to plant trees throughout the eastern prom, western prom, and throughout the city. There's four cherry trees in front of City Hall. And I think that spring spirit that it brings and the happiness is a real tribute to the type of tree that we picked out today. So next spring, we're going to have shade, but we'll have cherry blossoms to come and enjoy. So thank you for coming today. That's great for having me involved. Thank you very much. And just put this together very quickly, so we really appreciate it. And Anne Pringle wanted me to just make note very quickly that we obviously are looking for any students or young people that would want to participate in the exchange next summer. So if you know of anybody, recruitment is on. And it's a terrific event and opportunity for young people to go to Japan. So does anybody else want to say anything? Well, if not, thank you very much and thanks for being here. Good morning, Mayor Hamano. This is Mayor Brennan from Portland, Maine. And we're standing here with Jeff Sandler from Friends of Shinigawa. And we just planted a Japanese cherry blossom tree in Post Office Park in honor of our 30-year anniversary sister city relationship with your great city. And this is my granddaughter who helped plant the tree. So we just wanted to say hello to you. Thank you for the wonderful visit in April that we had to Japan. And this fulfills the promise we made to plant a cherry tree in honor of the relationship that we have, again, with your wonderful city. And so I'm going to turn it over to Jeff Sandler. Thank you, Mayor Hamano, once again for your vision and support of this relationship that has continued and benefited the citizens of both Portland and Shinigawa all these years. And whenever we look at this cherry tree here in our Post Office Park, we will think of the warmth and the gracious hosting that you have always extended to all Portland citizens whenever we have had the privilege to come to your wonderful city. So from all of us here in Portland, Maine, Domo arigato gozaimashita.


Chapter 7 of Mental Efficiency Candid Remarks There are times when the whole free and enlightened press of the United Kingdom seems to become strangely interested in the subject of success—of getting on in life. We are passing through such a period now. It would be difficult to name the prominent journalists who have not lately written, in some form or another, about success. Most singular phenomenon of all, Dr. Emil Reich has left Plato, Duchesses and Claridge's in order to instruct the million readers of a morning paper in the principles of success. What the million readers thought of the doctors' stirring and strenuous sentences I will not imagine, but I know what I thought as a plain man. After taking due cognizance of his airy play with the constants and variables of success, after watching him treat energetics, his wonderful new name for the science of success, as though, because he had made it end in X, it resembled mathematics, I thought that the sublime and venerable art of mystification could no further go. If my fellow pilgrim, through this veil of woe, the average young man who arrives at Waterloo at 9.40 every morning with a cigarette in his mouth, and a second-class season over his heart, and vague aspirations in his soul, was half as mystified as I was, he has probably ere this, decided that the science of success has all the disadvantages of algebra without any of the advantages of cricket, and that he may as well leave it alone lest evil should befall him. On the off chance that he has come as yet to know decision about the science of success, I am determined to deal with the subject in a disturbingly candid manner. I feel that it is as dangerous to tell the truth about success as it is to tell the truth about the United States, but, being thoroughly accustomed to the whistle of bullets round my head, I will nevertheless try. Most writers on success are, through sheer goodness of heart, wickedly disingenuous. For the basis of their argument is that nearly any one who gives his mind to it can achieve success. This is, to put it briefly, untrue. The very central idea of success is separation from the multitude of plain men. It is perhaps the only idea common to all the various sorts of success — differentiation from the crowd. To address the population at large, and tell it how to separate itself from itself is merely silly. I am now, of course, using the word success in its ordinary sense. If human nature were more perfect than it is, success in life would mean an intimate knowledge of oneself, and the achievement of a philosophic inward calm, and such a goal might well be reached by the majority of mortals. But to us success signifies something else. It may be divided into four branches. One, distinction in pure or applied science. This is the least gross of all forms of success as we regard it, for it frequently implies poverty, and it does not by any means always imply fame. Two, distinction in the arts. Fame and adulation are usually implied in this, though they do not commonly bring riches with them. Three, direct influence and power over the material lives of other men, that is to say distinction in politics, national or local. Four, success in amassing money. This last is the commonest and easiest. Most forms of success will fall under one of these heads. Are they possible to that renowned and much flattered person, the man in the street? They are not, and well you know it, all you professors of the science of success. Only a small minority of us can even become rich. Happily, while it is true that success in its common acceptation is, by its very essence, impossible to the majority, there is an accompanying truth which adjusts the balance, to which the majority do not desire success. This may seem a bold saying, but it is in accordance with the facts. Conceive the man in the street suddenly by some miracle invested with political power, and of course under the obligation to use it. He would be so upset, worried, wearied and exasperated at the end of a week, that he would be ready to give the eyes out of his head in order to get rid of it. As for success in science or in art, the average person's interest in such matters is so slight, compared with that of the man of science or the artist, that he cannot be said to have an interest in them. And supposing that distinction in them were thrust upon him, he would rapidly lose that distinction by simple indifference and neglect. The average person certainly wants some money, and the average person does not usually rest until he has got as much as is needed for the satisfaction of his instinctive needs. He will move the heaven and earth of his environment to earn sufficient money for marriage in the station to which he has been accustomed, and precisely at that point his genuine desire for money will cease to be active. The average man has this in common with the most exceptional genius, that his career in its main contours is governed by his instincts. The average man flourishes and finds his ease in an atmosphere of peaceful routine. Men destined for success flourish and find their ease in an atmosphere of collision and disturbance. The two temperaments are diverse. Naturally the average man dreams vaguely upon occasion. He dreams how nice it would be to be famous and rich. We all dream vaguely upon such things. But to dream vaguely is not to desire. I often tell myself that I would give anything to be the equal of Cinque Vallée, the juggler, or to be the captain of the largest Atlantic liner. But the reflective part of me tells me that my yearning to emulate these astonishing personages is not a genuine desire, and that its realisation would not increase my happiness. To obtain a passably true notion of what happens to the mass of mankind in its progress from the cradle to the grave, one must not attempt to survey a whole nation, nor even a great metropolis, nor even a very big city like Manchester or Liverpool. These panoramas are so immense and confusing that they defeat the observing eye. It is better to take a small town of say twenty or thirty thousand inhabitants, such a town as most of us know more or less intimately. The extremely few individuals whose instincts mark them out to take part in the struggle for success can be identified at once, for the first thing they do is to leave the town. The air of the town is not bracing enough for them. Their nostrils dilate for something keener. Those who are left form a microcosm which is representative enough of the world at large. Between the ages of thirty and forty they begin to sort themselves out. In their own sphere they take their places. A dozen or so politicians form the town council and rule the town. Half a dozen businessmen stand for the town's commercial activity and its wealth. A few others teach science and art or are locally known as botanists, geologists, amateurs of music or amateurs of some other art. These are the distinguished and it will be perceived that they cannot be more numerous than they are. What of the rest? Have they struggled for success and been beaten? Not they. Do they, as they grow old, resemble disappointed men? Not they. They have fulfilled themselves modestly. They have got what they genuinely tried to get. They have never even gone near the outskirts of the battle for success. But they have not failed. The number of failures is surprisingly small. You see a shabby, disappointed, aging man flit down the main street and someone replies to your inquiry that so and so one of life's failures, poor fellow. And the very tone in which the words are uttered proves the excessive rarity of the real failure. It goes without saying that the case of the handful who have left the town in search of the success with the capital S has a tremendous interest of curiosity for the mass who remain. I will consider it. The successful and the unsuccessful. Having boldly stated that success is not and cannot be within grasp of the majority, I now proceed to state, as regards the minority, that they do not achieve it in the manner in which they are commonly supposed to achieve it. And I may add an expression of my thankfulness that they do not. The popular delusion is that success is attained by what I may call the Benjamin Franklin method. Franklin was a very great man. He united in his character a set of splendid qualities as various in their different ways as those possessed by Leonardo da Vinci. I have an immense admiration for him. But his autobiography does make me angry. His autobiography is understood to be a classic, and if you say a word against it in the United States, you are apt to get killed. I do not, however, contemplate an immediate visit to the United States, and I shall venture to assert that Benjamin Franklin's autobiography is a detestable book and a misleading book. I can recall only two other volumes which I would more willingly revile. One is Samuel Budget, the successful merchant, and the other is from Log Cabin to White House, being the history of President Garfield. Such books may impose on boys, and it is conceivable that they do not harm boys. Franklin, by the way, began his autobiography in the form of a letter to his son. But the grown man who can support them without nausea ought to go and see a doctor, for there is something wrong with him. I began now, blandly remarks Franklin, to have some acquaintance among the young people of the town that were lovers of reading, with whom I spent my evenings very pleasantly. In italics, and gained money by my industry and frugality, end of italics. Or again, quote, It was about this time I conceived the bold and arduous project of arriving at moral perfection. I made a little book in which I allotted a page for each of the virtues. I ruled each page with red ink, so as to have seven columns, one for each day of the week. I crossed these columns with thirteen red lines, marking the beginning of each line with the first letter of one of the virtues, on which line, and in its proper column, I might mark, by a little black spot, every fault I found upon examination, to have been committed respecting that virtue upon that day. End quote. Shade of Franklin, where ere thou art, this is really a little bit stiff. A man may be excused even such infamies of priggishness, but truly he ought not to go and write them down, especially to his son. And why the detail about red ink? If Franklin's son was not driven to evil courses by the perusal of that monstrous autobiography, he must have been a man almost as astounding as his father. Now, Franklin could only have written his immortal classic from one of three motives. One, sheer conceit. He was a prig, but he was not conceited. Two, a desire that others should profit by his mistakes. He never made any mistakes. Now and again he emphasises some trifling error, but that is only his thumb. Three, a desire that others should profit by the recycle of his virtuous sagacity to reach a similar success. The last was undoubtedly his principal motive. Honest fellow who happened to be a genius. But the point is that his success was in no way the result of his virtuous sagacity. I would go further and say that his dreadful virtuous sagacity often hindered his success. No one is a worse guide to success than your typical successful man. He seldom understands the reasons of his own success, and when he is asked by a popular magazine to give his experiences for the benefit of the use of a whole nation, it is impossible for him to be natural and sincere. He knows the kind of thing that is expected from him, and if he didn't come to London with half a crown in his pocket, he probably did something equally silly, and he puts that down, and the note of the article or interview is struck, and good-bye to genuine truth. There recently appeared in a daily paper an autobiographic, didactic article by one of the world's richest men, which was the most inadequate article of the sort that I have ever come across. Successful men forget so much of their lives. Moreover, nothing is easier than to explain an accomplished fact in a nice, agreeable, conventional way. The entire business of success is a gigantic tacit conspiracy on the part of the minority to deceive the majority. Are successful men more industrious, frugal, and intelligent than men who are not successful? I maintain that they are not, and I have studied successful men at close quarters. One of the communist characteristics of the successful man is his idleness, his immense capacity for wasting time. I stoutly assert that as a rule successful men are by habit comparatively idle. As for frugality, it is practically unknown among the successful classes. This statement applies with particular force to financiers. As for intelligence, I have over and over again been startled by the lack of intelligence in successful men. They are indeed capable of stupidities that would be the ruin of a plain clerk. And much of the talk in those circles which surround the successful man is devoted to the enumeration of instances of his lack of intelligence. Another point. Successful men seldom succeed as the result of an ordered arrangement of their lives. They are the least methodical of creatures. Naturally, when they have arrived, they amuse themselves and impress the majority by being convinced that right from the start, with a steady eye on the goal, they had carefully planned every foot of the route. No! Great success never depends on the practice of the humbler virtues, though it may occasionally depend on the practice of the prouder vices. Use industry, frugality, and common sense by all means, but do not expect that they will help you to success, because they will not. I shall no doubt be told that what I have just written has an immoral tendency, and is a direct encouragement to sloths, thriftlessness, etc. One of our chief national faults is our hypocritical desire to suppress the truth on the pretext that to admit it would encourage sin, whereas the real explanation is that we are afraid of the truth. I will not be guilty of that fault. I do like to look a fact in the face without blinking. I am fully persuaded that per head there is more of the virtues in the unsuccessful majority than in the successful minority. In London alone are they not hundreds of miles of streets crammed with industry, frugality, and prudence. Some of the most brilliant men I have known have been failures, and not through lack of character, either. And some of the least gifted have been marvellously successful. It is impossible to point to a single branch of human activity in which success can be explained by the conventional principles that find general acceptance. I hear you, O reader, murmuring to yourself, this is all very well, but he is simply being paradoxical for his own diversion. I would that I could persuade you of my intense seriousness. I have endeavoured to show what does not make success. I will next endeavour to show what does make it, but my hope is forlorn. The inwardness of success. Of course one can no more explain success than one can explain Beethoven's C minor symphony. One may state what key it is written in, and make expert reflections upon its form, and catalogue its themes, and relate it to symphonies that preceded it, and symphonies that followed it. But in the end one is reduced to saying that the C minor symphony is beautiful, because it is. In the same manner one is reduced to saying that the sole real difference between success and failure is that success succeeds. This being frankly admitted at the outset I will allow myself to assert that there are three sorts of success. Success A is the accidental sort. It is due to the thing we call chance and to nothing else. We are all of us still very superstitious, and the caprices of chance have a singular effect upon us. Suppose that I go to Monte Carlo, and announce to a friend my firm conviction that red will turn up next time, and I back red for the maximum, and red does turn up. My friend in spite of his intellect will vaguely attribute to me a mysterious power, yet chance alone would be responsible. If I did that six times running all the players at the table would be interested in me. If I did it a dozen times all the players in the casino would regard me with awe, yet chance alone would be responsible. If I did it 18 times my name would be in every newspaper in Europe, yet chance alone would be responsible. I should be in that department of human activity an extremely successful man, and the vast majority of people would instinctively credit me with gifts that I do not possess. If such phenomena of superstition can occur in an affair where the agency of chance is open and avowed, how much more probable is it that people should refuse to be satisfied with the explanation of sheer accident in affairs where it is to the interest of the principal actors to conceal the role played by chance? Nevertheless there can be no doubt in the minds of persons who have viewed success at close quarters that a proportion of it is due solely and utterly to chance. Successful men flourish today and have flourished in the past who have no quality whatever to differentiate them from the multitude. Red has turned up for them a sufficient number of times, and the universal superstitious instinct not to believe in chance has accordingly surrounded them with a halo. It is merely ridiculous to say, as some do say, that success is never due to chance alone, because nearly everybody is personally acquainted with reasonable proof on a great or a small scale, to the contrary. The second sort of success, be, is that made by men who, while not gifted with first class talents, have beyond doubt the talent to succeed. I should describe these men by saying that, though they deserve something, they do not deserve the dazzling reward known as success. They strike us as overpaid. We meet them in all professions and trades and we do not really respect them. They excite our curiosity and perhaps our envy. They may rise very high indeed, but they must always be unpleasantly conscious of a serious reservation in our attitude towards them. And if they could read their obituary notices, they would assuredly discern therein a certain chilliness, however kindly we acted up to our great national motto of De Mortuis Nylnist Bunkham. It is this class of success which puzzles the social student. How comes it that men without any other talent possess a mysterious and indefinable talent to succeed? Well, it seems to me that such men always display certain characteristics. And the chief of these characteristics is the continual insatiable wish to succeed. They are preoccupied with the idea of succeeding. We others are not so preoccupied. We dream of success at intervals, but we have not the passion for success. We don't lie awake at nights pondering upon it. The second characteristic of these men springs naturally from the first. They are always on the lookout. This does not mean that they are industrious. I stated in a previous article, my belief, that as a rule successful men are not particularly industrious. A man on a raft with his shirt for a signal cannot be termed industrious, but he will keep his eyes open for a sale on the horizon. If he simply lies down and goes to sleep, he may miss the chance of his life in a very special sense. The man with the talent to succeed is the man on the raft who never goes to sleep. His indefinable orb sweeps the mane from sunset to sunset. Having sighted a sale, he gets up on his hind legs and waves that shirt in so determined a manner that the ship is bound to see him and take him off. Occasionally he plunges into the sea, risking sharks and other perils. If he doesn't get there, we hear nothing of him. If he does, some person will ultimately multiply by ten the number of sharks that he braved. That person is called a biographer. Let me drop the metaphor. Another characteristic of these men is that they seem to have the exact contrary of what is known as common sense. They will become enamoured of some enterprise which infallibly impresses the average common sense person as a mad and hopeless enterprise. The average common sense person will demolish the hopes of that enterprise by incontrovertible argument. He will point out that it is foolish on the face of it, that it has never been attempted before, and that it responds to no need of humanity. He will say to himself, this fellow with his precious enterprise has a twist in his brain. He can't reply to my arguments, and yet he obstinately persists in going on. And the man destined to success does go on. Perhaps the enterprise fails. It often fails. And then the average common sense person expends much breath in eye told you so's. But the man continues to be on the lookout. His thirst is unassuaged. His taste for enterprises foredoomed to failure is incurable. And one day some enterprise foredoomed to failure develops into a success. We all hear of it. We all open our mouths and gape. Of the failures we have heard nothing. Once the man has achieved success the thing becomes a habit with him. The difference between a success and a failure is often so slight that a reputation for succeeding will ensure a success, and a reputation for failing will ensure failure. Chance plays an important part in such careers but not a paramount part. One can only say that it is more useful to have luck at the beginning than later on. These men of success generally have pliable temperaments. They are not frequently un-moral, but they regard a conscience as a good servant and a bad master. They live in an atmosphere of compromise. There remains Class C of success, the class of sheer high merit. I am not a pessimist, nor am I an optimist. I try to arrive at the truth, and I should say that in putting success C at ten percent of the sum total of all successes I am being generous to Class C. Not that I believe that vast quantities of merit go unappreciated. My reason for giving to Class C only a modest share is the fact that there is so little sheer high merit and does it not stand to reason that high merit must be very exceptional? This sort of success needs no explanation, no accounting for. It is the justification of our singular belief in the principle of the triumph of justice, and it is among natural phenomena perhaps the only justification that can be advanced for that belief. And certainly when we behold the spectacle of genuine, distinguished merit gaining without undue delay and without the sacrifice of dignity or of conscience, the applause of the kind-hearted, but obtuse and insensible majority of the human race, we have fair reason to hug ourselves. Mental Efficiency and Other Hints to Men and Women by Arnold Bennett Chapter 8 The Petty Artificialities The phrase Petty Artificialities, employed by one of the correspondents in the Great Simple Life Argument, has stuck in my mind, although I gave it a plain intimation that it was no longer wanted there. Perhaps it sheds more light than I had at first imagined on the mental state of the persons who use it when they wish to arraign the conditions of modern life. A vituperative epithet is capable of making a big show. Artificialities is a sufficiently scornful word, but when you add Petty you somehow give the quietest to the pretensions of modern life. Modern life had better hide its diminished head after that. Modern life is settled and done for in the opinion of those who have thrown the dart. Only it isn't done for really, you know. Petty, after all, means nothing in that connection. Are there, then, artificialities to not Petty, which are noble, large and grand? Petty means merely that the users of the word are just a little cross and out of temper. What they think they object to is artificialities of any kind, and so to get rid of their spleen they refer to petty artificialities. The device is a common one and as brilliant as it is futile. Rude adjectives are like blank cartridge. They impress evane people, including the birds of the air, but they do no execution. At the same time let me admit that I deeply sympathise with the irritated users of the impolite phrase Petty artificialities, for it does at any rate show a divine discontent. It does prove a high dissatisfaction with conditions which at best are not the final expression of the eternal purpose. It does make for a sort of crude and churlish righteousness. I well know that feeling which induces one to spit out savagely the phrase Petty artificialities of modern life. One has it usually either on getting up or on going to bed. What a Petty artificial business it is getting up, even for a male. Shaving, why shave? And then going to a draw and choosing a necktie. Fancy an immortal soul, fancy a fragment of the eternal and indestructible energy which exists from everlasting to everlasting deliberately expending its activity on the choice of a necktie. Why a necktie? Then one goes downstairs and exchanges banal phrases with other immortals. And one can't start breakfast immediately because some sleepy mortal is late. Why babble? Why wait? Why not say straight out go to their deuce all of you? Here it's nearly ten o'clock and me anxious to begin living the higher life at once instead of fiddling around in petty artificialities.  Give me my bacon instantly and let me gobble it down quick and be off.  This would at any rate not be artificial. It would save time. And if a similar policy were strictly applied through the day one could retire to a well-earned repose in the full assurance that the day had been simplified. The time for living the higher life, the time for pushing forward those vast schemes of self-improvement which we all cherish, what decidedly have been increased? One would not have that maddening feeling which one so frequently does have when the shades of night are falling fast that the day had been frittered away. And yet, and yet, I gravely doubt whether this wholesale massacre of those poor petty artificialities would bring us appreciably nearer the millennium. For there is one thing and a thing of fundamental importance which the revolutionists against petty artificialities always fail to appreciate. And that is the necessity and the value of convention. I cannot in a paragraph deal effectively with this most difficult and complex question. I can only point the reader to analogous phenomena in the arts. All the arts are a conventionalization and ordering of nature. Even in a garden you put the plants in rows and you subordinate the well-being of one to the general well-being. The sole difference between a garden and the wild woods is a petty artificiality. In writing a sonnet you actually cramped the profoundest emotional conceptions into a length and number of lines and a jingling of like sounds arbitrarily fixed beforehand. Wordsworth's the world is too much with us is a solid horrid mass of petty artificiality. Why couldn't the fellow say what he meant and have done with it instead of making powers rhyme with ours and worrying himself to use exactly a hundred and forty syllables? As for music the amount of time that must have been devoted to petty artificiality in the construction of an affair like Bach's Chacon is simply staggering. Then look at pictures absurdly confined in frames with their ingenious contrasts of light and shade and mass against mass. Nothing but petty artificiality. In other words nothing but form, form which is the basis of all beauty whether material or otherwise. Now what form is in art, conventions, petty artificialities are in life. Just as you can have too much form in art so you can have too much convention in life, but no art that is not planned in form is worth consideration and no life that is not planned in convention can ever be satisfactory. Convention is not the essence of life but it is the protecting garment and preservative of life and it is also one very valuable means by which life can express itself. It is largely symbolic and symbols while being expressive are also great time savers. The despisers of petty artificialities should think of this.  Well, searchers after the real, what would you substitute for it? If you dropped it and substituted nothing the result would tend towards a loosening of the bonds of society and it would tend towards the diminution of the number of your friends. And if you dropped it and tried to substitute something less artificial and more real you would accomplish no more than you accomplish with cards. You would inconvenience everybody and waste a good deal of your own time. I cannot too strongly insist that the basis of convention is a symbolism primarily meant to display a regard for the feelings of other people. If you do not display a regard for the feelings of other people you may as well go and live on herbs in the desert. And if you are to display such a regard you cannot do it more expeditiously at a smaller outlay of time and brains than by adopting the code of convention now generally practised. It comes to this, that you cannot have all the advantages of living in the desert while you are living in a society. It would be delightful for you if you could but you can't. There are two further reasons for the continuance of conventionality and one is the mysterious but indisputable fact that the full beauty of an activity is never brought out until it is subjected to discipline and strict ordering and nice balancing. A life without petty artificiality would be the life of a tiger in the forest, a beautiful life perhaps, a life of burning bright but not reaching the highest ideal of beauty. Laws and rules, forms and ceremonies are good in themselves from a merely aesthetic point of view apart from their social value and necessity. And the other reason is that one cannot always be at the full strain of self-improvement and evolutionary progress and generally beating the big drum. Human nature will not stand it. There is, if we will only be patient, ample time for the artificial as well as for the real. Those people who think that there isn't ought to return to school and learn arithmetic. Supposing that all petty artificialities were suddenly swept away and we were able to show our regard and consideration for our fellow-creatures by the swift processes of thought alone, we should find ourselves with a terrible lot of time hanging heavy on our hands. We can no more spend all our waking hours unconsciously striving towards higher things than we can dine exclusively off jam. What frightful prigs we should become if we had nothing to do but cultivate our noblest faculties. I beg the despisers of artificiality to reflect upon these observations, however incomplete these observations may be, and to consider whether they would be quite content if they got what they are crying out for. CHAPTER IX THE SECRET OF CONTENT I have said lightly apropos of the conclusion arrived at by several correspondence and by myself that the cry for the simple life was merely a new form of the old cry for happiness, that I would explain what it was that made life worth living for me. The word has gone forth and I must endeavour to redeem my promise. But I do so with qualms and with diffidence. First, there is the natural instinct against speaking of that which is in the core of one's mind. Second, there is the fear, nearly amounting to certainty, of being misunderstood or not comprehended at all. And third, there is the absurd insufficiency of space. How ever. For me, spiritual content, I will not use the word happiness which implies too much, springs essentially from no mental or physical facts. It springs from the spiritual fact that there is something higher in man than the mind, and that that something can control the mind. Call that something the soul or what you will. My sense of security amid the collisions of existence lies in the firm consciousness that just as my body is the servant of my mind, so is my mind the servant of me. An unruly servant, but a servant, and possibly getting less unruly every day.  The mind can only be conquered by regular meditation, by deciding beforehand what direction its activity ought to take, and insisting that its activity takes that direction. Also, by never leaving it idle, undirected, masterless, to play at random like a child in the streets after dark. This is extremely difficult, but it can be done, and it is marvelously well worth doing. The fault of the epoch is the absence of meditativeness. A sagacious man will strive to correct in himself the faults of his epoch. In some deep ways the 12th century had advantages over the 20th. It practised meditation. The 20th does sando exercises. Meditation, I speak only for myself, is the least dispensable of the day's doings. What do I force my mind to meditate upon? Upon various things, but chiefly upon one. Namely, that force, energy, life, the incomprehensible has many names, is indestructible, and that in the last analysis there is only one single unique force, energy, life. Science is gradually reducing all elements to one element. Science is making it increasingly difficult to conceive matter apart from spirit. Everything lives, even my razor gets tired. And the fatigue of my razor is no more nor less explicable than my fatigue after a passage of arms with my mind. The force in it, and in me, has been transformed, not lost. All force is the same force. Science just now has a tendency to call it electricity, but I am indifferent to such baptisms. The same force pervades my razor, my cow in my field, and the central me, which dominates my mind. The same force in different stages of evolution. And that force persists forever. In such paths do I compel my mind to walk daily. Daily it has to recognise that the mysterious ego controlling it is a part of that divine force which exists from everlasting to everlasting, and which in its ultimate atoms nothing can harm. By such a course of training, even the mind, the coarse practical mind, at last perceives that worldly accidents don't count. But, you will exclaim, this is nothing but the immortality of the soul over again. Well, in a slightly more abstract form it is. I never said I had discovered anything new. I do not permit myself to do anything else. I do not permit myself to be dogmatic about the persistence of personality or even of individuality after death. But in basing my physical and mental life on the assumption that there is something in me which is indestructible and essentially changeless, I go no further than science points. Yes, if it gives you pleasure, let us call it the immortality of the soul.  And my mind, knowing by this time that I am a hard master, obediently does so. Am I a portion of the infinite force that existed billions of years ago, and which will exist billions of years hence, going to allow myself to be worried by any terrestrial physical or mental event? I am not. As for the vicissitudes of my body, that servant of my servant, it had better keep its place and not make too much fuss. Not that any fuss occurring in either of these outward envelopes of the eternal me could really disturb me. The eternal is calm. It has the best reason for being so. So you say to yourselves, here is a man in a penny-weekly paper advocating daily meditation upon the immortality of the soul as a cure for discontent and unhappiness. A strange phenomenon. That it should be strange is an indictment of the epoch. My only reply to you is this. Try it. Of course I freely grant that such meditation, while it casts out fear, slowly kills desire and makes for a certain high indifference, and that the extinguishing of desire with an accompanying indifference be it high or low, is bad for use. But I am not a use, and today I am writing for those who have tasted disillusion, which use has not. Yet I would not have you believe that I scorn the brief joys of this world. My attitude towards them would feign be that of Socrates, as stated by the incomparable Marcus Aurelius. He knew how to lack and how to enjoy those things in the lack whereof most men show themselves weak and in the fruition in temperate. Besides commanding my mind to dwell upon the indestructibly and final omnipotence of the force which is me, I command it to dwell upon the logical consequence of that unity of force which science is now beginning to teach. The same essential force that is me is also you. Says the Indian proverb, I met a hundred men on the road to Delhi and they were all my brothers. Yes, and they were all my twin brothers, if I may so express it, and a thousand times closer to me even than the common conception of twin brothers. We are all of us the same in essence. What separates us is merely differences in our respective stages of evolution. Constant reflection upon this fact must produce that universal sympathy which alone can produce a positive content. It must do away with such ridiculous feelings as blame, irritation, anger, resentment. It must establish in the mind an all-embracing tolerance until a man can look upon the drunkard in his drunkenness and upon the wife-beater in his brutality with pure and calm compassion, until his heart goes out instinctively to every other manifestation of the unique force, until he is surcharged with an eager and unconquerable benevolence towards everything that lives, until he has utterly abandoned the presumptuous practice of judging and condemning, he will never attain real content. Ah, you exclaim again, he has nothing newer to tell us than that the greatest of these is charity. I have not. It is it may strike you as excessively funny, but I have discovered nothing newer than that. I merely remind you of it. Thus it is, twins on the road to Delhi, by continual meditation upon the indestructibility of force that I try to cultivate calm, and by continual meditation upon the oneness of force that I try to cultivate charity, being fully convinced that in calmness and in charity lies the secret of a placid, if not ecstatic, happiness. It is often said that no thinking person can be happy in this world. My view is that the more a man thinks, the more happy he is likely to be. I have spoken. I am overwhelmingly aware that I have spoken crudely, abruptly, inadequately, confusedly, end of Chapter 9 and end of mental efficiency and other hints to men and women by Arnold Bennett. Recording by Ruiz Golding.


Internet auctions. Welcome to the new digital age where you can buy a house without getting up from your couch. If you don't understand how online auctions work, don't worry. We have got you. This is the Private Property Podcast. Do me here. Welcome. Congratulations to Shante Evans Shanto for walking away with that 500 grand cash prize from yesterday's show. Do the right thing and share this post with your friends and the person with the most shares will get 500 grand cash. So strap in and get comfortable because we will be going back in time to teach you a little bit more of our history. This is the South African history. Property rights are significant in South Africa because South Africans were wrongfully deprived of their homes during apartheid. People were forced to leave their homes and these were either taken away or demolished. Of course, since the Bill of Rights was commissioned, this has become a thing of the past. Thanks to strict property rights laws. A more recent piece of history, Bitstream is the first South African company dedicated to online property auctions. Founded by Craig Cooper, who is the MD of CRE Africa and warehouse finder, Bitstream launched in early 2020 and specializes in industrial and commercial properties. On the 19th of June, 1913, the government established the Natives Land Act number 27 of 1913. This act states that 7% of land will be allocated to Africans, while the more fertile land will be allocated to the white minority. The act also prohibited Africans from purchasing and renting any land that belonged to whites. The online property market auction is a growing field with an estimated 25% sale increase in five years. This also makes the South African property market accessible to overseas, whilst giving landlords a wider access to potential international buyers. Remember Oliver Thambo's famous words, we all belong to South Africa and South Africa belongs to us all. Not too long ago, I caught up with Tanya Smith and Anthony Strubelle from Pam Golding Properties Group, and we had a conversation about online property auctions. Tanya has a postgraduate diploma in financial planning and a become in law. She specializes in assisting the Pam Golding Properties Group with problem solving as well as conversations on the complicated transactions that surround online property auctions. The second guest joining us is in charge of incorporating a green agenda into the future of residential property in South Africa. This was the Pam Golding brand dimension and his vision is to raise awareness in the environmental spaces on the property industry. Here's how the conversation went. To me, nice to be here. Thank you, really appreciate you taking our time to talk property auctions and we're specifically talking online auctions, which is something that is becoming increasingly popular with how COVID has left the landscape of property looking. So let's just talk a little bit in terms of what it looks like. We've spoken about them before in terms of how they've changed or how people have now become accepting of them, but maybe Anthony, you can just take us through how a typical property auction looks before we get into the conversation that if someone is watching us for the first time, they know how a property auction looks, an online one that is, and what are the different things that are done there that are not done in a conventional one that is face to face. Yeah, so I think that's a great place to start to me. And I think your intro was quite insightful because you mentioned property investors and primary home buyers as a secondary market. And I think that's very true. So I think, you know, traditional property auctions are quite fierce in places. I think they're perceived as places where you get massive bargains, but where the quality potentially is not ideal. So there are auctions of the traditional auction and certainly in the minds of home buyers, proper everyday home buyers, that they very loaded in terms of being quite daunting and certainly the old days of physical auctions, we had to go to a property and they were perceived and still are too large to be the domain of bargain hunters, investors, which you mentioned earlier on cash flush, opportunists, developers, people looking to flip properties, etc, etc. So it's that traditional dimension of properties that I think the general public is scared of, firstly, they daunted by it, they daunted by the sort of energy and the intensity of the so-called auction room, being under pressure to bid. And primary home buyers like to take their time.  So there's traditionally a contradiction there, i.e. they too intense, you can only buy distressed properties. So I think the general buying public has tended to write them off. And I think it's that principle that we are looking to change. And you mentioned that I think the online environment has become far more comfortable generally speaking, with people being able to engage online, being able to trade and buy online online shopping is now sort of an everyday event. And I think it's that trend towards that comfort around the online environment that we are looking to develop and to offer additional value to home buyers accordingly. Sure. Thank you so much for that. Tanja, I'll bring you in here and ask about the process or the process of actually going into the online auction and how different it is. And I like that Anthony was talking about the pressure that a lot of people face. That even anxiety, the anxiety already exists with getting a property. But now it's this different mode of transacting that is making people a little bit also jittery. Just talk us through the process. How does the process look and what does one need to prepare in order to go into an online auction? And how does it look before the deal is initiated all the way to when the deal is closed? I think what's important firstly is to distinguish between how we present our auctions and how traditional auctions work, as Anthony mentioned. So what we try to do is we try to help buyers buy property in a very, in a non-invasive space. So how we change it, if we have a process where we allow finance buyers to consider properties and get finance and buy property on auction, but earlier process. And then we also lead buyers by the property on auction, but it's a timed auction. So we give buyers the dictate period to consider if they want to buy the property. And we just found that giving all the buyers on a property an hour to compete may work from a competitive advantage, but it doesn't necessarily give buyers comfort. You know, a normal private treaty buyer, it's just too competitive a space. So what we do, we charge a minimal fee for buyers to take part in the auction to register. They only have to upload an ID in a proof of residence. And if they're the successful bidder, the fee is allocated towards the purchase price, otherwise it's refunded to the buyers afterwards. So it literally costs buyers nothing to take part in the auction apart from actually just committing to be part of the process. And once they are inside the building or the auction room, how does it look for them? Are they in a virtual room that they need to be sending maybe chats on a Zoom call or whatever platform that's being used? Take us a little bit through that experience and how it becomes exhilarating even because traditional auctions are exhilarating. People want to hear that hammer being slammed and hearing going once, going twice. Is it the same? Is it done the same, exactly the same way or are there particular things that are done to tweak it because it's an online environment? And do you want to get this one? Yeah, I will. So no, there's no hammer. There's no room.  So it's live bidding. You can see your competitors. You can't see their names, but they've all got bidding numbers. And basically you start at what we call an opening bid, which is set at the beginning of the auction.  So they are competitive. They are clicking up over time. And there is that energy. But I think going to the hammer once again, we want to alleviate the hammer. So the best way of putting it is we've tried to take all the exciting things and the good things of an auction, but alleviate all the bad things of an auction. So in other words, that intensity, the nervousness, the insecurity, just giving more time and providing the buyers the opportunity to bid against each other and push that price up between the comfort of your own home.  I think primary home buyers, they like to take time. And auctions historically didn't give you that time. And they like to be in comfort. They like to be able to engage with family and friends and what have you. All those wonderful things, they tend to disappear when you're in the context and the intensity of an actual auction room. So that's what we've tried to develop is give buyers that comfort, but yet still the excitement of being able to bid in lifetime. Yes, Tanya. And sorry, I just want to add that basically the online auction is accessible via laptops and email and cell phones as well. So you can basically take part in the auction from any platform that you want. And as soon as you register for a property or you can also ask to be notified if any offers are made on the property. So you'll receive an email as soon as somebody plays the bid and you will be able to increase your bid. And then at the end of the auction, obviously it's going to get a bit more heated. So if somebody places the bid in the last minute, the auction period will automatically be extended for another minute to give another party time to increase their bid. So it does get a bit more heated towards the end of the auction. Sure. No, thank you so much for that. And very insightful. So before we wrap up our conversation tonight, what advice would you like to give? And I'll take both of you with this in regard to this to say, what advice would you give to property players and people who are prospective in the market, people who are already investing, people who want to grow their portfolios? What advice would you give them when it comes to online auctions? We've already really ascertained that this is one of those things that one needs to start doing. If depending on their needs, depending on what they would like to do with their portfolio, it's something to explore. But what would you advise them to do going forward? Sangya, let me start with you on this first. Ladies first.  So that's very important. And you must you must equip yourself with knowledge. So even as a seller, you must never move out of your comfort zone. You must make sure that you deal with people who support you and equip you with knowledge so that you are completely comfortable with the process. And that would be my advice. And Alex, I'll extend that if I may. So in this day and age, to me, buyers have such incredible access to information on properties and access to pricing and value information. So you really, really can, as a buyer, get a very, very good understanding for price. Look, price is very influenced by what's happening today. If you're looking at a particular suburb and they're 50 properties for sale and then tomorrow they're only 10 or next month they're only 10, pricing is relevant to the exact point in time. But the best advice we can give any buyers get to understand value in the market. What's selling for what's a good price, what's a premium price. And then when you're equipped with that knowledge of understanding real value, then you're able to buy the best deal. Because I think property, it's critical, like any investment, whatever you can buy at, knowing that there's an upside value is a good investment. And I think we say that you mentioned property portfolios. And once again, you're talking primarily from an investment perspective. We like to talk to the primary buyer who's not looking at a portfolio. They've got a home, they want to sell their home, now they want to buy a new home. Our mission here is to make auctions viable and valuable and accessible to those primary one home buyers because there's incredible value to be had there. Value is not confined to the savvy investor. We want to make the everyday home buyer aware of the real concept of value and the ability to buy really well and get a very, very good deal. That's really what we're trying to offer them. No, thank you so much. I just want to add to me, sorry, I also feel that it's important to deal with a reputable brand. I'm not saying there's not great smaller companies out there, but if you deal with a big brand, it's easy to escalate if there's a problem or get matters resolved if anything goes wrong. So I think especially if you're moving out of your comfort zone, it's very important to trust the person that you're dealing with. No, definitely. And that's the reason why we brought the experts in to have this conversation with tonight. Thank you so much, Anthony. Thank you so much for taking our time and informing our family in terms of what to do when it comes to online auctions. Thank you so much for joining us and have a great evening. And thank you to you for staying till the end of the show. What an informative conversation around online property auctions. The time has come for us to now tell you who won that 500 grand cash prize. Thank you so much for sharing and engaging with us. And the winner for that prize is drum roll, please. Thank you so much for engaging with us and 500 grand is coming your way. And if you are also standing in line to win that 500 grand, make sure that you watch us every single weekday, 7pm right here on the private property podcast. Also, do ensure that you subscribe to all our social media pages, like, comment and subscribe so that you never get to miss a beat. Have a beautiful one. My name is Tumi. Have a good evening.


I'm going to, as the oldest member of the committee, I'm going to convene this meeting and I want to welcome you to the first meeting of the finance committee in the fifth session of the Scottish Parliament. Agenda 1 item 1 is the declaration of interests and with members' permission I'm going to go round the table for declarations. You will have read the paper that was circulated in terms of declarations. If I may start off, I am a part-time member of staff at Glasgow University in the role of Professor of Scottish Culture and Governance. I earn approximately £17,000 a year for that. I have an office provided by the university in five lilybank gardens and I just point out the address because it's next to the fiscal commission and in fact is joined by a corridor with the fiscal commission just in case people pick that up. I am a writer and commentator. I've written seven books in which I still receive meagre royalties and I do occasional work, a consultancy work for a range of bodies, including a not-for-profit global charity of conservation called SIAC, which does data processing of monuments throughout the world. I think that those are the relevant interests that I have. I'll ask the... I'll ask Eric Johnson to... Thank you very much. I believe that I have no relevant interests but I will draw members' attention to the entry in my register of interests, where it declares my ownership of property. I think that the only relevant potential interest is that I'm currently in negotiations to be entered into membership with the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales. I've got three interests to declare. First, I'm a member of the Law Society of Scotland, although I'm not currently holding a practicing certificate. Secondly, I have an interest into residential properties as landlord, which are currently rented out and I'm therefore in receipt of rental income. Thirdly, like yourself, I'm a published author and am in receipt of meagre royalties and occasional payments for our parents at book festivals. I don't think that I have any interests that I'm required to declare. James Kelly. The record declares that my brother Tony Kelly is a sheriff within the sheriffdom of Glasgow in Strathkelven. I declare that I own a house in Stirling local authority area that I rent out and I own so in 50 per cent of a company that lets out residential property. I'm a director of the common rule and renumerated a trustee of a charity Education International. I was a director of a number of manufacturing and consultancy businesses, but those were directives that were resigned prior to being elected to the Parliament. Professor Tomkins. Thank you, Mr Tomkins in the Parliament. I have three relevant interests. I think that the first is that I hold the John Millar chair of public law at the University of Glasgow where I am in receipt of remuneration for services as an employee of the university. I have irregular income through conferences and I am the published author of more books than I can remember about constitutional law mainly and I have some royalty income from that. I understand that I have no relevant interests to declare. I have no relevant interests to declare other than what is declared in my voluntary section of the declaration. For the record, convener, I was a former local councillor in East Asia Council. I own a very small number of shares in the Comarant Football Club and I serve on that club's community engagement board. I used to be an employee of learning and teaching Scotland, which is now known as Education Scotland. I have no relevant interests to declare. Thank you very much indeed. The agenda item 2 is the choice of convener. The selection of the convener requires a member to be nominated by at least one other member of the committee. The Parliament has agreed that only members of the Scottish National Party are eligible for nomination as convener of the committee. That being the case, I seek nominations for the position of convener. Nominate yourself Michael Russell to be convener of the finance committee for this session. Are there any other nominations? As one nomination has been received, I, for us, have a committee to agree. Mr Kelly. I do have a point to raise in relation to your nomination. I think that we probably should proceed with the process unless you wish to object to the process or do you wish to make an observation about it? I wish to object to the process. My objection is on the basis that I believe that you have a conflict of interest. As you declared in the previous section of the agenda, you hold a professor position at Glasgow University for which you are nominated to the sum of £17,000. As this committee will consider matters of finance, including the budget and allocations of the budget to universities, I believe that you have a conflict of interest and that you have a paid interest from a university that has an interest in the budget process. Therefore, I think that there is an issue with your nomination. Okay. There is not anything that the standard order is about objecting to this, so this becomes a matter, in my view, of an election or otherwise. If you wish to object to this, I suggest that I put this to the vote and that you vote as you wish. Would that be acceptable to the committee? Is that acceptable practice? Yes. Does the member wish to push it to the vote? That would be the issue. Yes, I do wish to push it to the vote because I believe that the matters that I have raised are relevant. Okay. In that case, I am going to put this to a vote of the committee. The committee can either vote for the nomination received or vote against it. As one nomination has been received, I therefore ask the committee to agree that I be chosen as convener of the finance and finance committee. Firstly, are we all agreed? Yes. Okay. In that case, we will go to a vote. Those in favour of the nomination, please show. Can the clerks count this, please? Those against, please show. It is therefore agreed that nine votes to two. I then need to move to the, and thank you for the nomination and for the election. Agenda item three has the choice of a deputy convener. The selection of deputy convener requires a member to be nominated again by at least one member of the committee. The Parliament has agreed that the members of the only members of the Scottish Conservative Unionist Party are eligible to be chosen as deputy convener. That being the case, can I invite nominations for the position of deputy convener? Myrdy Fraser. Thank you. May I nominate Alex Johnson? Okay. Alex Johnson has been nominated. Are there other nominations? Again, the same procedure applies if there is any objection, then we will take a vote on this. One nomination has been received, and therefore I am asking the committee to agree that Alex Johnson will be chosen as deputy convener of the finance committee. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Alex Johnson, I should have asked you if you are willing to be. Good. Well, I would be crying. I am fortunate that I always have to start again. The next item is to agree to take business in private. Agenda item four relates to a contingent liability issue, which the Scottish Government has requested that the committee consider before the summer recess. Such issues have been dealt with regularly in private in the terms set out in the written agreement between the committee and the Government, as they often relate to Scottish Government contracts that involve third parties. It is, of course, open to members to object to items being taken in private if they so wish, but can I ask members whether they are agreed to consider agenda item seven in private? Anybody contrary minded? No, good. Item five relates to the appointment of a budget adviser. You will have read the paper. The committee has traditionally appointed adviser to assist the committee in its scrutiny of the Scottish Government budget. I should perhaps start this by saying that there is a question in some people's minds as to whether a single adviser at this stage of the process can actually do the job that we are requesting. I think that we should discuss what that job is. That is not part of our discussion about who would do that job. That will come at the next meeting when we look at the nominations that we have been seeking. However, the work of the committee as we will come on to when we discuss the work programme is likely to be complex. It will, for the first time, consider substantial matters of taxation and it will also consider the normal scrutiny of the budget, which is a complex process. I should make the point that the committee will not consider matters of the constitution at this stage because the standing orders of the committee have not yet been changed to give the committee that responsibility. That will only happen in September, if it happens. It will be considered by the Procedures Committee. I am expecting it to report sometime after summer recess. The committee, for the period that is certainly into the early part of after summer, will deal with finance and not constitution. We can come back to the constitution issue of advice later on, but for this specific item, this is to do with the budget process. Adam, do you want to speak? No. Ah, not yet. You were waving your pencil, I wondered. It is not an auction or you would have bought something. Right. Can I invite comments on the appointment of a budget adviser and any views that members have? I think that it might be difficult to find somebody who is an expert in both those areas, and therefore it might suit us better to have two people. If such a person existed that had all the talents to cover the responsibilities, that might be possible, but I agree that it might be necessary, given the additional powers that are coming to the Parliament, to look at two areas of expertise and look at two individuals that hold that expertise. Two very different things potentially require a different background and experience, and I think that it would make sense to look at two options if that was possible. I mean, as I understand it, we would have to probably seek additional resource, but that is not impossible to do. I think that that would be better than finding ourselves constrained in terms of the advice that we get particularly on what is going to be a complex year. I was a constitutional adviser to the House of Lords Constitution Committee for six years, and it was an annual appointment that was then subject to reappointment. I think that in the papers that suggested that the proposed term would be two years. I would recommend, at least in the first instance, thinking about a one-year appointment, or perhaps two one-year appointments, on the basis that the responsibilities that are coming to this committee are different from those that our sister committee had in the last Parliament, and that we should give ourselves some wiggle room for maneuver and learn. I think that that is very sound. I mean, I would tend to agree with that. Would members agree with that as an approach at this stage? Because when we come to the work programme, it is obviously going to be clear that we are in a process of transition. I think that you are right that we should not tire ourselves down too greatly. That is likely to affect the number of people interested in taking the job on. The space is currently putting together a list. I mean, I could not answer that at the moment. We already have some names on the list, obviously. We would have to speak to them again in relation to that. What will we do? We will do that before the next meeting when we bring back the list, so we will have that information for you then. Okay. We would seem to be minded then firstly to go for probably splitting this into two, and secondly to looking at an annual appointment if, as Patrick points out, it was not a disincentive in terms of appointment. I mean, if it was, then I think that we would want to reconsider that. Would that be where the committee is minded to go? Is that acceptable? Okay. Can we take that forward and look at the next meeting to look at a suggested list for two posts? Perhaps we could also start the process of seeking the resource by saying that we think that it should be two posts at this stage. That process we need to take forward. Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much indeed, and we look at this in private. Sorry, Adam. I mean, can I just be clear that this does not preclude us from in the future the possibility of considering the appointment also of an advisor on the constitution? Absolutely, it does not. The resource would stretch potentially to three advisors. Okay. If we require that resource, then it is right that we seek that resource. Okay. Thanks. I don't think that these are not items that can be skimped, so if we find ourselves in that position, but we won't be in a position to do that until the autumn, I suspect. Good. Could I also suggest that, given that we are then going to be dealing with names and appointments at the next meeting that we take this item in private at the next meeting, I think that it's impossible to do it in any other way, frankly. Okay. Good. Thank you very much indeed. The next item involves consideration of the legacy paper, and there are two items that are particularly important. First of all, having read the legacy paper on several occasions, now I think that we should record our thanks to the members of the previous finance committee and to its convener and vice convener for the work that they undertook. This is a robust and informative legacy paper, and it should give us food for thought, particularly in shaping what is going to be a very busy and complex series of actions over the next few months. We need to do two things today to start an openness process. One is to invite the cabinet secretary to give evidence to us at the next meeting to open his thoughts up to us, because I think that it's important that we know what he and the Government are thinking about those matters. The second one at that meeting is to look at the issue of the work programme. I just want to make a couple of points before I open it up and ask Gallagher to contribute. There is a clear role that we have to fulfil in budget scrutiny, so our hands are tied to some extent about what we're going to be doing at certain times of the year. When the budget process starts in September, we have a clear run through and things that we have to do right through until January or early February. In addition, for the first time, the Parliament will be considering serious matters of taxation, and the budget scrutiny model that we are operating on is a model that is predicated on spending but not on raising money. That creates a new situation that we have to consider and that the Government has to consider, both in terms of timescale and in terms of how that scrutiny process goes forward. We have a model that is much respected and has been effective in terms of budget scrutiny. I wouldn't want to lose that, but equally we will have to adapt it. The first task that we have is to undertake our budget scrutiny task and to negotiate that as ever with the Scottish Government, but also to put in place, along with the Government, the question of how we put in a new but model. That is going to require parallel actions to take place over the winter and into the spring. Then there will be other issues that each of us are bringing to the table in terms of our interests in the subject and, ultimately, our interests in the constitution as well, which we will want the committee to consider. However, the space for us to do so in the period certainly up until January will be very limited. It will be more likely that we will have time and space thereafter, probably from the beginning of February, through until next summer. That is likely to be the annual programme that we will take. We hope to have a wayday in August to start to take those issues forward and also to help us—I have asked the clerks also to consider how else we can do this—to help us to come to grips with some of the very complex issues of which we will deal. Those of us who were in the last Parliament and who nodded sagely when the fiscal framework was going through have not necessarily engaged in the greatest detail with the fiscal framework, which it is now incumbent upon us to do. I think that we need to look at the budget process, we need to look at the new process of putting in place a new construct for scrutiny and we will also have our own issues to bring forward. Those are all things that we need to address here. I look forward to an early opportunity to have the minister before us, because I think that a close relationship between the committee and the minister, the members of the committee and the minister, is vital. I know that the work that was done by John Swinney, while we may have disagreed with him, to a large extent on many of the things that he did, the fact that we had that good work in relationship was key to the success of the process. I also agree that, of course, with the new powers of taxation coming our way, the committee will have to adapt the way that processes the budget. It is not only taxation, my concern also extends the borrowing, but that is just me. The convener also mentioned the issue of the fiscal framework. Having been on the devolution and further powers committee at the time, the fiscal framework was being developed. It was disappointing to some extent that members of the Parliament and members of the committee were almost excluded from that process. I would like, if possible, to see a stronger relationship developed so that we could better monitor what is going on in that area. For that reason, I think that the constitutional element will become very important to us and has an importance that will be reflected in the fiscal work of this committee, not just in some separate box that is constitution. Good points. Who would like to—I hope that we would all contribute—Murdo? There are two issues that are touched on in the legacy paper that I think are important. The first is the role of the Scottish Fiscal Commission that has newly been established and its remit was only agreed in detail as part of the fiscal framework discussions. I think that it would be important that this committee has an early opportunity to meet with the fiscal commission members and have a full understanding from them as to how they see their role and how the committee might interact with the fiscal commission. In terms of other issues in the legacy paper—there is one particular issue that is of interest having met the Law Society tax committee just last week—there are issues around LBTT and its operation. I noticed in the legacy paper at paragraph 14 that there is a recommendation that the committee looks to review the first year of LBTT, how it has operated, what the impact has been on the market, what the tax take has been because the suggestion is that the tax take is below original expectations and specifically look at the question of the additional dwelling supplement that has been newly introduced and how that is operating in practice and how practitioners, lawyers, including those who are having to deal with the practicalities of that particular measure. I hope that that is something that the committee could consider. I think that that should certainly be passed to the character of consideration in the work programme. On the fiscal commission, the intention, I believe, is to have them present at the away day for an informal presentation and I will meet the convener of the fiscal commission to have a first conversation before the end of session and I will obviously report on that and I will have a chance to meet all the members and to have that conversation, but I think that we will require to establish a close relationship with them. I am happy to support the proposals that I have there at Macai and also the commission engaged with the committee in the near future. I think that there are just one or two issues that I wanted to pick out. One is about the recommendation in the legacy paper that the committee should be leading on wider debate within Scotland about tax policy, and I struggle to see when we will have a chance to do that. We are about to break for summer recess, not very long after the summer recess a draft budget will be published. It seems that there is no space for that wider debate about tax policy to take place. It would be regrettable if we simply had to dingy that aspect of the legacy paper, but it is worth noting that that is going to be a lack of time. I wanted to say something about the timescale of the budget process and the impact on other committees. On a number of occasions over the last session, other committees have quite justifiably complained that they are unable to make the judgments that they need to. The one that irritated me most frequently was that the carbon assessment of the budget was not produced in time for the climate change committee to do its budget scrutiny. There are a number of other examples around the remits of other committees who will be reporting to us on the budget about their specific portfolios and remits. I think that we need to put pressure on the Government to ensure that it has the information available for them to do their job. I just want to say something as well about minority government. Experience tells us that, in a period of minority government, there can be much more substantial changes, for example, to legislation as it goes through. Where very substantial changes come through to legislation, it may well be that the financial memorandum has introduced bears very little relationship to the final article that is being passed. I notice that there is a recommendation that the Government should be asked to bring forward some sort of post stage 1 update on the financial memorandum. I wonder if that proposal needs to be beefed up in the context of minority government and ask the Government to give an assessment of the possible changes that are under consideration by Parliament in legislation. There might be other changes that we want to make to the budget process itself given the context of minority government, but that is just one aspect that may be relevant. Two important points. One is that everything that has been said in the discussion in the clerks will consider and refine through into the work programme paper, so we are essentially laying out the ground. I think that those are all important issues. We will have, I hope, the Cabinet Secretary here in two weeks key issues, which I think members and you particularly will want to raise one of those issues from the legacy paper. It is not my intention in the briefings that the committee would have to suggest questions for members. I think that members should want to ask their own questions, but, as questions occur to you, you may want to ask Spice or the clerks for further information to allow those questions to be filled out, but they are important questions that you are reflecting on. The timescale will have the chance to influence, of course, strongly, because we are talking about a new budgetary model as that goes forward. I think that those are very important parts. We are just picking up a point that has already been made about timescales and new powers as well. Moving from just primarily scrutinising spending to also including discussions on tax and the need to A, get it right and B, tax has a big impact on behaviour and making sure that our discussions are given enough time and we get enough time to scrutinise as well to ensure that this time in a year where there is a lot of flux and we have these new powers that we get it right and so not hurrying this side of Christmas. There is a protocol established that will require to be considered as we go on, and the committee will have to be happy that it can recommend it to the Parliament. I know the comments that people have made about the changing landscape and the additional tax powers and that has got to be a great focus for the committee. I think there are two practical points that come out to me from the legacy paper. I think that is first of all the use of forecasting, particularly in terms of the fiscal commission. I think that can greatly help the work of the committee working along with the budget adviser in terms of forecasting the impact of changes and also different scenarios can help inform our discussion and also give a certain robustness to any decisions that we take going forward. I think the other thing that is of interest is outcome-based budget scrutiny. I was first sat on the finance committee in 2007 and there was a lot of discussion then about outcome-based budgeting. It is probably fair to say that it is something that we have not addressed correctly and got right. I think that the Government would even acknowledge that, but the point of it is that it is not just about pushing the spending into different areas. It is about what that spending is actually achieving, and I think that it is right to focus on outcomes. We need a framework around that so that we can properly assess the outcomes and whether the spending that has been allocated to different areas is there for effective. That is an important point, and I am sure that that requires to be built into our work programme, both in what we do through the budget but also as a special item. Thank you. I will just echo that point that James has made. I am obviously on the health and sport committee as well, which is the biggest spending committee, and the relationship between where the money is going and what outcomes it is delivering are and how that aligns up with priorities and how that is measured. I think that that is very important and something that we should consider, but that is all. Adam? Thanks. I found the legacy paper extremely helpful, and I would echo the remarks that have already been made about it. I think that looking carefully at the role of the Scottish Fiscal Commission should be a short-term priority of this committee. I think that almost doing post-legislative scrutiny of the Fiscal Framework Agreement would also be—I mean, I know it is not legislation, but post-agreement scrutiny of that would be valuable. I do have a concern about building in enough time in this committee's very crowded agenda in the autumn for whatever the constitutional consequences are of next week's referendum. I am very conscious of the protocols. I would not say anything about the referendum, but whatever the result on Thursday, it will have constitutional consequences, not only for the United Kingdom, but also for Scotland. We should not, I think, convener, with respect, imagine that it would be appropriate only to start consideration of those in the new year. I think that we will have to find time, whether we like it or not, in the autumn to take on board something of that. I think that you are absolutely right about that. Although we cannot go into any detail of it, that will be an imperative, and I do not think that there is any question that that will require to be done. It is just in terms of the way that the committee operates. I am obviously entirely in the hands of the committee, but during the discussion of committee reform in the last session, there were discussions about ways in which committees might operate either through rapporteurs, and this committee has worked through rapporteurs before, I think, has it? I do not think that you mean by rapporteur, but not particularly, I tend to work as a committee as a whole, to be honest. Either through rapporteurs or through small groups, with the consent of the committee, because it is, we will be immensely pressed. I mean, this committee will meet once a week, and I really do not think that it is sensible for committees to meet twice a week, but there will be other things to be done, so I will hopefully the committee will be agreeable about working in slightly different ways from time to time, and I think that we should have developed the confidence in each other that we can allow that to happen. Just a couple of points. I echo Murdo Fraser's point about looking at LVTTT, and the issues there have obviously been concerns raised by the Scottish Property Federation and others about the impact on that particular tax. Obviously, we should be more understanding that. I would agree with what has been said about outcome-based budget scrutiny, and also, if we can look at not just outcomes but the impacts as well, I think that that would be of budget decisions that would be beneficial. The other thing in terms of timescales that has come up, I obviously note that the legacy paper says that the committee was often put under unrealistic timescales by other committees. I am not sure in terms of financial memorandum—there is over 60 financial memorandum, I think, in the last term—I am not sure if we are going to be dealing with the same amount of legislation in this term or not. Obviously, I have not been on the committee before, but I do not know if there is anything that we can do to change that, but it might be worth discussing that. That is an important point. With the secondary legislation too, which, given the implementation of tax powers, I suspect will be considerable, we will have to look at that. In your own remarks, you talked about a new construct for scrutiny. While I completely agree with the comments made about outcomes-based scrutiny, I think that there is a case to be made for trying to put some kind of scrutiny process in at an early stage of financial planning. Murdo Fraser might recall some of the experiences that we both had in the audit committee over a number of years, in which there were some common threads running through the public sector and public finances, and we always seemed to intervene or scrutinise at the end of a process. A good practice would tell me, and I would hope that Members would agree, that if we can do any element of earlier scrutiny of some of the financial planning, perhaps we might not get the opportunity to do it too much, convener, and I am not suggesting that we begin to attempt to micromanage projects or capital projects or whatever that is going on, but I think that there is a job of work to be done to look at as early a stage as possible if financial planning is reliable enough for us. If not us, who should do that kind of activity, and I hope that Members might support that, and the committee might get an opportunity to do something in that area. Good, thank you. Ash, would anybody like to make further comment? If not, I think that the clerks have a clear indication of what the initial priorities are. What I would suggest is that we have agreed to invite the Cabinet Secretary to come two weeks' time. I think that we should then consider a work programme in private, which is a normal way of doing it, and it will take account of the points raised here and the legacy papers, and we will then be able to discuss in more detail what we might do. We will also know what post-Brexit looks like, so we will have some idea of what will fit in there. Yes, we will take the paper in private, is that agreed? We are now at the end of the public part of the meeting, so I am going to close this part of the meeting, allow the public and the official report to leave, and then we will move into private session for agenda item 7.