Fighting fit on land, sea and offshore island

TIMES SQUARE: The boating community might have noticed in the classified advertisements of this paper the other day a Western…

TIMES SQUARE: The boating community might have noticed in the classified advertisements of this paper the other day a Western Fulmar being offered for sale with "extensive infantry".

Fair enough. I suppose theft is always a risk and the boat-owner has to be prepared. A good bunch of well-trained foot soldiers, patrolling night and day, should be well able to frighten off any would-be thieves.

If the sailor or yachtsman has a few bob more to spare, however, he would be well advised to invest in an additional troop of dragoons, with maybe a few hussars tagging along for reconnaissance purposes. All these lads are trained to fight on horseback as well as on foot.

The only trouble might arise at sea, on the boat itself. A relatively small craft like the Fulmar could easily capsize if the infantry, the dragoons and their mounts, all armed to the teeth (well, not the horse,obviously) were not properly positioned about the craft. A fast gybe, for example, could prove catastrophic if the men and their horses were not trained in racing manoeuvres.

READ MORE

Still, nothing daunts the genuine boat-lover. I myself will shortly be advertising for sale my oceangoing yacht, the Sloop John B, with a full complement of well-trained international mercenaries, all of them fighting fit and equally at home on land or sea. Never mind "full infantry": this is one of the best-defended boats in the country.

If by some chance my advertisement alludes to a "full compliment" of mercenaries, you can presume that as well as being skilled in the martial arts, they are a well-mannered bunch.

Right. Let us leave leisure activities aside for the moment. Obviously I must comment on Ansbacher. One of the most striking things about the affair has been the level of innocence proclaimed by many of those found to have made substantial offshore investments.

I am not one of those cynical people who believe these investors knew exactly what they were doing.

When a notably well-off lady says she thought that Ansbacher was "some man" (who made lucrative investments for her), I do not doubt her honesty. When another person claims that he is not "financially astute", I am inclined to believe him.

It should be obvious that, to large numbers of intelligent people, financial affairs - other than the basic stuff of paying bills and perhaps organising a mortgage - are a mystery, and a dreary one at that. Most people, if they could afford it, would probably hand over the management of even very modest financial affairs to experts, purely to avoid what they regard as tedium.

Given the truth of all this, why then do our schools not offer financial management as part of the curriculum (ideally starting at primary level), and employ teachers with flair and charisma who can add some sparkle to the subject? Clearly, "mathematics" is not serving the purpose.

In the meantime, perhaps what we need is a School for Cute Hoors, dedicated to the evergreen memory of Mr Des Traynor.

The other striking aspect of the Ansbacher affair is the fact that none of those involved in the scam seems to be in the least embarrassed at having been found out and publicly named. Indeed, there is probably more embarrassment on the part of those wealthy people who have not (yet) been named as account-holders.

Their stock must surely be falling rapidly among their friends, as word spreads that, despite the vast houses, the holiday homes, the gay parties, the exotic vacations and the impressive cars, their wealth did not extend to offshore island investment.

Will they and their spouses be able to cope with such scandalous revelations, to hold their heads any longer up in polite, particularly well-heeled society? Will counselling be available if they should need it?

I sincerely hope so.

The professor and eminent psychologist Vilhelm Castermein O'Connor pointed out to me in this regard that the notions of embarrassment and shame are, fortunately, "all but redundant" these days. When I asked what had happened to them, he pointed to the media: the huge success of confessional programmes and the proliferation of television shows wherein people vie with each other to perform, for massive audiences, the sort of actions "traditionally regarded as crass, vulgar and utterly disgusting".

By dint of these people's brave and selfless efforts, such actions were now becoming perfectly acceptable as mainstream entertainment.

The only thing we need to be ashamed of these days, according to the professor, "is shame itself".

So where did that leave the Ansbacher investors, I asked. "Well," he said, "they should try to modify their justified pride at being named and take into account the sensitivities of those who did not make it on to the list."

So the Ansbacher investors should not even think of apologising to those who honestly paid their taxes or indeed apologise to anyone? "Shame on you", said the professor, "for even suggesting it."