The Youth Hostel Association's future

Many years ago, I joined the Youth Hostel Association (YHA) as a life member. I can’t remember how much it cost, possibly about £100, but it was an easy decision. The primary reason I did was because they offered a good discount when you buy goods from a range of outdoor activities shops. As someone who enjoys an outdoor lifestyle, paying less on everyday essentials was attractive. It was a purely financial decision.

Today I cancelled my membership. Why?

Hostels versus hotels

I’ve never stayed in a YHA hostel, and never will. As a hostel rather than a hotel, even if they are more up market, the idea of sharing a room with a total stranger doesn’t appeal. Neither does having to go outside your room to visit a shared bathroom.

The YHA has made efforts to make themselves more appealing to a more discerning clientele. Some hostels have private rooms with a bathroom, but they still have bunk beds which range in number from two to eight. Having eight beds is useful if you’re travelling in a group, but it’s not for me.

Location, location, location

“To enrich the lives of all, especially young people, by providing brilliant hostel stays and experiences that improve physical health, mental wellbeing, and life skills.”

The YHA’s mission statement perfectly describes why it exists. There are around 150 hostels in the UK with most in rural locations, although there are hostels in towns and cities. This lends itself to those going walking, cycling, or climbing in the great outdoors.

Together with the mention of “especially young people” and the YHA’s mission seems a perfect fit to a slightly bygone age. An admirable age maybe, just one that lacks resonance these days.

It’s all about the money

Cost is also a factor. For a two bunk private room, the cost is approximately £80. That’s cheap, but when you’re competing with hotel chains like Premier Inn and easyHotel, it isn’t as attractive. They have double beds with a bathroom. You pay your money and make your choice, but I know which one I’d pick.

The future?

The YHA is selling off some of its hostels. You can still book a stay in them, but they won’t be managed directly by the YHA. The reason this is happening is financial. As a charity, it must raise funds to support its work. The Covid pandemic hit the charity hard, and it’s trying to recover from it.

The market for those wanting a hostel experience is there, but it is dwindling. With most young people having access to cars, the need to stay in a rural location isn’t as attractive. Being able to come home to a cheap and clean hotel near good restaurants and bars appeals. That’s worth paying a bit more for.

Will the YHA exist in 50 years? Probably, but it will be a much more niche organization with fewer properties. That’s a shame, but like any other business, it needs to keep up with the times.

All I want for Christmas is...

I don't particularly enjoy Christmas. There, I said it. Don't get me wrong. I'm not against Christmas. I enjoy bits of it, but could do without its paraphernalia. My friend's wife sums it up perfectly. "I could do without the faff." she says. I couldn't agree more.

As an introvert, I find some of the Christmas traditions a little tiresome. For example, there's pressure to be more sociable. At work it's the office Christmas party. I haven't been to one for 25 years, mainly because I like to keep my work and social life separate. Also because younger sales staff dominate most Christmas knees-ups determined to get as drunk as possible. I like a drink, but I want to remember what I got up to.

What is Christmas for me?

Christmas for me has always been about family. That suited me fine coming from a small family. Neither my sister nor I had children, so Christmas Day was a small, quiet affair. We'd meet up in one of our houses to eat, drink, and be merry before falling asleep on the sofa. It was more about spending time with people we loved. It was a quiet and circumspect day, but it was fun.

My Godson's family also got together each year. It became a tradition that on Boxing Day they'd invite members of their extended family and us over for lunch. We're old family friends going back decades, so it was good to catch up. It was a very formulaic event always ending up with silly party games for the children.

The problem was, as the children grew, the fun aspect dried up. The silly party games were now just silly. It was still good to meet up and catch up on what everyone was doing, but this could have been done in a hour or two. Drawing the event into a nine hour marathon really started to grate.

What about presents? 

From early on, we had a limit on the amount we could spend on someone's present. It wasn't a massive amount, but enough to buy something useful and meaningful. It worked reasonably well, and the surprise factor of opening a present wondering what it was in the parcel rarely dulled.

The problem was that over time, the fun of choosing a present for someone disappeared. The run up to the big day was spent asking folk what they wanted, only to receive a, "Let me think about it" answer. By the time an answer was forthcoming, it meant a frantic dash to buy said gift before it went out of stock. Even worse, folk sometimes bought something they wanted, gave it to another family member to wrap it and give it back to them.

In the end, I suggested we stop buying each other presents. That went down like a lead balloon, but over the years they saw sense and the present buying stopped.

My new family

These days the Christmas Day extravaganza is even bigger. My spouse's family is big. As one of four sisters, most of whom live fairly close to each other, any family event involves close to 20 people. The requirements of such a large group, make the organised lunches of yesteryear a thing of the past. Memories of having elbow room at the table are long gone. It's all a bit manic and disorganised. As someone who likes things neat and tidy, I find this difficult.

The joke goes that you don't marry your wife, but also her family. That is certainly true. Things aren't helped by not particularly liking certain members of my wife's extended family. I wouldn't have changed my decision to marry one iota, but I wish her brother-in-law's father didn't have such racist and sexist views. He's a lovely guy, but I find myself avoiding bringing up certain topics to avoid a row.

My perfect Christmas

If I had my way, Christmas would be a quiet, gentile affair. I love the tradition of Christmas, but modern day commercialism has made us forget about what it really means. I love singing Christmas carols and hearing Christmas records on the radio. I love eating my roasted parsnips and pigs in blankets. I also like my peace and quiet, something I don't get with a large gathering. I like my space.

I'd be happy with just my wife and I alone on Christmas Day. I'd wake up and go for a run in the park. On returning home my wife would be up and after a shower we'd have a leisurely breakfast together. We'd make the obligatory phone calls to family members abroad, before cooking lunch. The rest of the day we'd play by ear. We'd do whatever took our fancy. I've been known to spend an hour or two gardening on Christmas Day!

The reality

My perfect Christmas is highly unlikely to happen. Family is very important to my wife. She's more of a social animal than me. She wants to ensure contact is maintained with our nieces and nephews as they grow up. I get this, but most are of an age where they want to be out enjoying themselves with friends rather than talking to their aunts and uncles.

As an introvert I'm not particularly keen on large gatherings. I find you can't be yourself. You have to present a version of yourself. It's all a bit formal. So I go along with the status quo. I do enjoy these occasions, but I wish that sometimes things could be different. Doing the same thing year in and year out makes the event less fun. I enjoy a bit of sponteniety. The excitement of Christmas past was the unexpected.

I sometimes wonder if part of my negativity toward Christmas is due to us not having children. Seeing Christmas through the eyes of younger family members brings some of the magic back into the season. Without that, Christmas descends into an endless spiral of tradition and commercialism. We're told you must have turkey for lunch, and watch the King's speech at 3pm. Blow that. We're all individuals with different personalities, cultures, and opinions. Let's celebrate that without forgetting what the Christmas story is about.

The religious bit, sort of!

Christmas is the biggest religious festival for Christians. It celebrates the birth of Christ. A new life. A new beginning. Even if you're not a Christian, it's this message of renewal that is important. Like Diwali for Hindus, Upavasatha for Buddists, and Eid for Muslims, you should take time to think about what's gone well and what could be done better.

More than anything, it's a time to be thankful. I always think of those less fortunate. I welcome celebrities who participate in campaigns to reach out to those on their own. I praise the landlords of a pub I know who open their doors on Christmas day to anyone on their own, giving them a free meal and a beer.

So if you've got this far, thank you for reading this post, and in the spirit of it let me know what I could do better. In the words of Tiny Tim, "Merry Christmas one and all."

Why do I blog?

In my late teens, I started to keep a diary. I religiously sat down to write a daily entry each day. If I missed a day, I'd write two entries the next day. I was pretty hardcore. It was mostly pretty uneventful stuff. Nothing very heavy. Just what I'd done that day, who I'd been with, and thoughts about what had happened. Anyone who'd have read it would have been asleep halfway through the first entry.

I stopped writing it somewhere in my early 20s. Why? In short, it wasn't a priority anymore. I found myself missing more and more daily entries, until I decided the millstone of daily entries wasn't something I wanted to keep up. Life had moved on. I'd started my first job. I'd new friends, and a thriving social scene. Finding the time to put pen to paper was just too scarce.

Then in the late 90s along came blogging. Around that time my job had taken off and I'd become one of the world's leading experts on a software application. I'd frequent the application's peer-to-peer forums, and answer questions. I found it immensely satisfying. It wasn't just helping others. I learned stuff too. It was interesting seeing how others were trying to achieve something I'd never thought of. It led to many discussions on how to meet their objective.

As time went on, I found myself repeating solutions. Wouldn't it be a better use of my time to record these somewhere and just provide a link. A blog was born, which led to an even greater exposure in my industry. The vendor invited me to speak at industry conferences and take part in expert panels. I was on their beta test team, and often input into the application's product development.

As with anything related to technology, change is the only constant. Over time the application changed beyond recognition, and my career took me into management. I was back in the time poor continuum. Blogging wasn't important enough again.

So here I am again. I like the informal nature of blogging. Unlike most of the writing I do in my day job, there's no real structure or rules. I can let my thoughts flow. I can't promise some earth shatteringly important news, but I hope it's interesting for you to read.

Dealing with Grief

My wife and I are off to a funeral later today. It is for the husband of a friend we've known for years. He'd been ill for awhile so his death wasn't totally unexpected, but it will still be a sad occasion. It is at times like this that I'm reminded of how I and those around me deal with grief. We don't all deal with it the same way, and it can be difficult for those around us to know how to deal with it too.

Dealing with death is difficult, especially if it is sudden and unexpected. Not having that person around can leave a massive void. Maybe it's a spouse you've lived with for most of your life but who suddenly is not there. Not having them gently snoring beside you in bed anymore, or missing being irritated by the way they used to fill the dishwasher. You've spent most of your life together, and know they're gone. The children have left home, and now there's just you wondering what you're going to do. Even if it is a more distant friend or relative, dealing with grief is hard.

In some countries we've different words for death, almost as a way of denying the reality that it exists. In the UK and Ireland we talk about someone's "passing", or commiserate with someone for their "loss" or "demise". Other cultures are more open about death, with very public demonstrations of grief. Here we don't like to acknowledge it, which is a shame. It feels awkward to talk about and we don't know what to say.

The number one rule of talking to someone who's experiencing grief is to acknowledge it and remember that it never goes away. It gets easier to deal with in time, but it can come back to hit you at any time. For example, I still feel sad every time I walk by a sweet shop that sells fudge, because my mother loved it. So when talking to someone grieving ask, "How are you today?" Note the "today" at the end. Without it, you'll almost certainly get a stock answer, "OK thanks". Maybe even repeat the question with, "No really, how are you today?". It is also important to acknowledge that someone may not want to talk. Should that happen just say something like, "Well I'm here for you when you do."

My number two rule is never say something that belittles someone's grief. If something you say could be translated into, "Don't be sad." don't even think of saying it. If you find yourself wanted to say, "It gets easier with time." or "They had a good life." take a second to think of something else. It's important to remember the person may be sad, and that being sad is good for them. It's all part of the healing process. In fact it is scientifically proven that sad tears contain different chemicals and enzymes designed to be beneficial. Happy tears do not.

Finally if like me you bottle up your emotions, don't. As a man, I do struggle with admitting when I'm feeling down. We men don't often open up to our friends in case it is seen as being weak or less manly. Men's mental health issues are thankfully more prominent now, and that's a massive leap forward. I lost my father suddenly when I was six, and to this day I still find funerals a difficult experience. I put this down to my mother thinking it best for me not to attend his funeral. As a result I never had a chance and grieve for my father properly. At that age I wasn't able to conceptualise my loss, and as a result wasn't able to rationalise it. My aunt once told me, "You're the man of the house now. You have to help your mum and sister." She was right of course, but just how was a six year old supposed to do that?

The moral of this post is to think carefully about what you say to someone coping with loss. Remember that every day is different. Someone dealing with getting young children ready for school on their own may not be feeling sad all the time, but there will be occasions when they will be. Acknowledge the situation and put yourself in their shoes.

Match report: AFC Wimbledon v Doncaster Rovers

There's nothing like the feeling of being pummelled by an opposition team for 89 minutes, and sneaking a winner in the 90th minute with a miss hit shot that defects past the keeper. We'll all experienced games where we've won but deserved to lose. This was not one of those days. Today was different. AFC Wimbledon beat Doncaster Rovers in a six pointer that decided who'd cement a play off place in League Two.

It was clear from the start just how important both teams judged this game to be. With Wimbledon just below Doncaster in the table, and both teams looking to move towards the automatic promotion place, a win would set a marker for the teams in a similar position. The form table suggested there was little between the two teams, something that became apparent as the game started.

The early exchanges were mainly in the Wimbledon half. Some pretty nervous defending from the Wimbledon back line and some pretty woeful Doncaster marksmanship saw honours even. As the first half wore on, Wimbledon got more into the game, creating a couple of chances to take the lead. Hutchinson and Smith in the midfield started to break up Doncaster's play and get Wimbledon going forward.

Doncaster could, indeed should, have been ahead before going behind. Twice in the first 20 minutes gilt edged chances were spurned. The worst was Hurst's lob where it seemed easier to score than miss the far post. Seeing him hold his head in his hands said it all. He knew what a big chance it was, and that wins are made out of fine margins. So it was that on 27 minutes Josh Kelly chased down a lose Donny pass, took the ball wide before crossing for Matty Stevens to nod the ball home.

The remainder of the game was a midfield war of attrition. Both sides battled to get control, but it was Wimbledon who won the battle. The impressive Hutchinson signed last week on a short term contract was the stand out, winning plaudits amongst the home fans. The standout stat shows Doncaster failing to register a single shot on target. Wimbledon only managed two themselves, but they made one of them count. Fine margins.

Despite the 1-0 score line, Wimbledon never really looked likely to lose. Yes Doncaster asserted increased pressure as the game went on. Attacking subs were brought on in an attempt to grab a point, but they met their match. O'Neill and Johnson at the back dealt with the arial threat well all game. Without the ball, Wimbledon harried and closed down in packs. Doncaster just couldn't get going.

You could say this was as one sided a 1-0 win you're likely to see. Once ahead, Wimbledon never really looked likely to lose. The home fans sensed this, getting behind the team. At the final whistle the euphoria of the win was evident. This game may not have been as big or emotional as some others this season, but it meant a lot.

1988 Clapham Junction railway crash

36 years ago today at the exact time I type this, I was on a train into work in London. Like any other work day, I sat reading a newspaper as the train trundled through Clapham Junction station. This would not be like any other day for commuters on trains running a few minutes behind me.

That day, one of the worst train disasters in UK history occurred  south of Clapham Junction railway station. A crowded commuter train crashed into the rear of another train that had stopped at a red signal. An empty train traveling in the opposite direction then sideswiped the stationary train. 35 people died in the collision, while 484 were injured, 69 seriously.

Obviously i was oblivious to the carnage that was unfolding behind me. This was before mobile phones and rolling news channels. It was only later in the day that I was told about the crash. Even then, it took several hours for the seriousness of it to become clear.

The collision was the result of a signal failure caused by a wiring fault. New wiring had been installed, but the old wiring had been left in place and not adequately secured. The required supervision hadn't been performed. A contributing factor to the number of casualties was the old wooden-framed carriages that disintergrated on impact.

There's a memorial plaque on the side of the railway line where the accident occurred. Tens of thousands of travelers pass it everyday, but few even know of its existence or what it commemorates. I still sometimes pass through Clapham Junction station on a train. When I do, I sometimes wonder what could have happened if I had been running a few minutes late that day. Could I have been on a train that was involved in the crash?

The day that changed Ireland

On this day in 1921, a treaty was signed by representatives of Britain and the Irish parliament (Dáil Éireann) that would have ramifications to this day. A war of independence had been grinding its way to a stalemate between the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and British forces. Over three years, the violence escalated to a point where it became clear neither side was likely to win. Against this background talks took place to end the conflict.

The IRA's objective was to win independence from Britain. Britain on the other hand was recovering from a long conflict itself in Europe, and was beginning to see the demise of its empire. Much has been written about the peace talks and the politics at play, particularly about the role of the two main Irish figures, Michael Collins and Eamon de Valera. They didn't agree on a strategy for the talks, and the British exploited this.

The talks resulted in a proposal to grant independence to the 26 counties in the south of Ireland. The remaining six (Northern Ireland) would remain part of the United Kingdom. The population of those six counties was largely Protestant following >hundreds of years of emigration from Britain. The proposal didn't sit well with the IRA. They saw the six counties remaining as British as a betrayal of their objective. The problem was Britain was unwilling to grant independence to the whole of Ireland. It was a "take it or leave it' proposal.

Early in 1922 a fractious and emotional debate on the proposal resulted in a majority voting to ratify the treaty, passing it into law. The war of independence was over and most of Ireland had independence. The problem was Ireland went from one conflict to another, only this time between Irishman and Irishman. The Irish Civil War started.

Although the conflict was relatively short, the ramifications of it can be felt to this day. Those who fought are no longer with us, but Irish politics is still mired in it. The three main parties in Ireland are:

• Fianna Fail: Founded by Eamon de Velara after a split with Sinn Fein, it was opposed to the treaty.
• Fine Gael: Originated out of the independence struggle and the pro treaty members of the Dáil.
• Sinn Fein: The political wing of the IRA was founded in 1905 as part of the independence movement.

Some say there isn't a lot of difference politically these days between Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. Both are centre right parties, but for many decades men and women voted for them based on which side of the treaty debate they agreed with. Recently, Sinn Fein has enjoyed a resurgence of popularity in the 26 and 6 counties. As a socialist party, they've positioned themselves on the left of Irish politics. They pick up votes as a reaction to what people see as two parties arguing over just who's the more conservative.

With the six counties still part of the United Kingdom, and Sinn Fein unwilling to relinquish its claim for independence for the whole of Ireland, Irish politics looks likely to continue in the same vein for years to come. Let's hope any major change that comes the way of Ireland in peaceful.

A milestone disappointment

I've donated blood since my early 20s. I see it as a way to give back what I don’t necessarily need. Having less blood volume for a couple of days is a small price to pay for potentially saving someone's life.

In my 20s donating blood was easy. I even used to exercise afterward with little or no after effects. In my 30s I noticed a slight deterioration in my ability to exercise after donating. These days you're advised not to exercise for a day afterward, and I can understand why. It takes me a couple of days to even feel like gentle exercise. It all to do with your blood oxygen levels. If you've less blood, your muscles can't get the oxygen they need as efficiently.

Today was my donation day, my 100th. Such a milestone isn't something most donors reach. Many drop out because of health issues or lifestyle changes. I'm thankful that my health is still good to do so.

So imagine my disappointment when my iron levels were low, meaning I wasn't able to donate. That's only the third time out of a hundred I've been turned away. Oh well. At least I've reached another milestone.

St.Who's Day?

Today is St.Andrew's Day, Scotland's national day. Scotland has only had a national holiday since 2006, which surprised me. Which makes me wonder why a country's national saint doesn't get as much publicity as say a certain Irish saint. His feast day is celebrated around the world on March 17th. Even those with no links to Ireland seem to claim St.Patrick as their own on that day.

Like other saints, St.Andrew is claimed by lots of other countries too, with Romania, Greece, and Ukraine among the frontrunners. Even Barbados stakes a claim to him! In southern parts of Europe, on the day before St.Andrew's Day there's a superstition that a young lady sees her future husband. It also happens to be the most popular day for vampire activity. I trust the two aren't connected.

Anyway, back to St.Andrew. Why isn't he celebrated in the UK more widely? If the Irish can successfully market a Welshman as their own, why can't Scotland market one of the original twelve apostles? Heck! The Catholic Church never even formally canonised Patrick yet still is a saint! 

Admittedly, Andrew didn't banish all snakes south of York. He didn't use the thistle to illustrate Christian thinking. In fact, there's precious little we know about him. Many books of the Bible don't even mention him. Andrew may have been a humble fisherman, so it is hard to find his unique selling point.

Perhaps that's it. He's just not as sexy as good old Paddy.

The influence of church or state

Today in the UK House of Commons our MPs voted in favour, by a margin of 330 to 275, of a bill calling for assisted dying. This free vote, meaning an MP was not obliged to vote a particular way by their party’s whip, means that the first steps in changing the law have passed. It now need to go through the rest of the parliamentary process, including a vote in the House of Lords, before it can become a reality. 

I’m unsure which way I’d have voted given the chance. I’ve watched relatives and friends with serious illness suffer towards the end of their life, so I understand why this debate happened. However, I’d want to ensure that the appropriate safeguards were in place to prevent people being forced or coerced into accepted their fate. There seems to be sufficient thought made to this. For example, it will only be available to those who are terminally ill and must be approved by two doctors and a judge.
 
The issue for me is that I can’t be sure what I’d want until faced with the reality of a terminal diagnosis. It’s all right saying I’m in favour of having the option of an assisted death, but I may think differently when faced with making the choice. Having the option is very different from saying you want it, so that’s OK, and you can always change your mind. That’s why I’m sympathetic.
 
As someone brought up in religious household, what is interesting is the disconnect between the church and state. In the UK the monarch is head of the Church of England, but thanks to Oliver Cromwell, no longer has control over their government’s policies. That said, I doubt this vote would have even taken place, let alone pass, 50 years ago. Attitudes have changed, and so has the power of the religious bodies to influence how we think. 
 
We’ve seen religious influence wain in other countries also. In my homeland Ireland, the pull of the Catholic churches influence is nothing like it was when I was growing up. Recent years have seen votes pass there on same sex marriage and abortion. My aunt, a missionary nun, would be proud of her church if she’d have lived to see the law pass! She was an educated lady, who saw firsthand what the absence of choice did to people. In her own way she was able to voice her thoughts within the confines of her role.
 
Whatever your thoughts on assisted dying, remember that people are coming from the right place. It’s a complicated topic, with different experiences and emotions. Whatever the result of this vote, let’s remember that this is about peace and dignity at the end of a person’s life.