There seems to be a bit of trouble, presently being played down by both sides, between NASA and the Apollo astronaughts over the sale of artefacts from the space programme dating back to the 1960′s and 70′s. Reports that Apollo 13 Commander Jim Lovell has been forced, under legal threat from the space agency, to return momentos he had put up for sale has thrown the spotlight on disagreements that have arisen over who actually owns the objects. Administrator Charles Bolden is reported as having had a meeting with former astronaughts Jim Lovell, Gene Cernan, Charlie Duke, Rusty Schweickart and other representatives of former astronaughts and agency personell regarding how to resolve the misunderstandings and ownership questions regarding flight momentos and other artifacts. There is a further difficulty in that Bonhams New York are to hold their Space History Sale in April. Quite why it has taken NASA the best part of 40 years to raise the issue when so much material has been sold openly at auction amid widespread publicity is unclear. As Ivan Macquisten of the Antiques Trade Gazette correctly states, any uncertainty over ownership rights will not be welcome by those in this area of the collectables market and needs quick resolution.

Every year, starting as early as January I keep a keen eye open for a very special gift to give at Christmas. It is not to give to the wife, the children or the grandchildren or a particular friend. It is for someone far more important. Namely me.

There are two criteria I set myself, firstly it must be something I would enjoy owning, and secondly it must be something that I consider has a good chance of increasing in value.

It is an interesting undertaking. As throughout the year I trawl the auction houses and the internet for the day job I am often tempted to make the purchase but tend to hold off in case something better comes along, usually kicking myself later for missing an obvious bargain on an item that would give me great pleasure.

This year has been easier. For some months I have been looking with increasing admiration at the work of the artist Carl Scaynes and have taken the plunge and purchased one of his works.

Carl Scaynes is a contemporary artist with a huge talent for creating the most wonderful floral paintings. His paintings are in the style of the impressionists.

Born in 1964 in London, He attended the Holburn Central School of Art and went on to hold his first one-man show in 1983 at Gallery Flasthead in Copenhagen.

This was followed by a joint exhibition in Geneva, Switzerland in 1984. In 1989/90 Carl completed work for London Contemporary Art, followed by publication of Giverney Celebration Paintings by Rosentiels Chelsea 1991 and a second Garden Collection for Rosentiels in 1993.

1998 saw work completed for the Lynton-Smith collection in Hong Kong, and at the same time was involved with Porters English Restaurant Collection, followed by the Jale Simensen Collection – Florida in 1999.

Carl Scaynes work has been purchased by the late Jack Palance, the actor and the late Benezir Bhutto, former premier of Pakistan and now me who is happily not yet late.

Does it meet my second criteria? – Who knows – there are many fine artists out there. You can buy a Carl Scaynes original for around £400 – just google him in and you will like as not find a gallery near you that will have, or can obtain his work.

However should he, and it is always a big if, sign a sole contract with a high end ”whitewall” gallery or dealer of note his prices could literaly treble virtually overnight.

You heard it here first.

There is something very addictive about “Blogging”. There is also a drawback. The addictive side is added to when a few kind souls contact you and say how much they enjoy your WordPress site. The drawback is that you then begin to think you should expand your content and give a wider audience the benefit (in your own eyes) of the obvious wisdom of your thoughts. You try to resist it. You have told WordPress that you will stick to your area of so called expertise. But you find yourself pacing around in the early hours of the morning twisting your fingers together in the growing belief that there are millions out there with whom you should share some news. You still resist. Until at last you can no longer deny your public the fantastic vision you alone possess. This final stage comes after a good dinner and three large ports. So for better or worse and with apologies to WordPress here I go.

 Many of you will have seen the second appearance of James Murdoch before the House of Commons culture, media and sports committee. At the meeting nothing new was discovered as James Murdoch had plainly wisely crafted his answers with the help of his Lawyers. However, there were two, in my mind, interesting developments. Firstly, a member of the committee, Louise Mensch,  excused herself from the proceedings early saying she had to “pick up her children from school” – Mr Murdoch had of course flown from the United States at great inconvenience to attend the meeting. Secondly, a member of the committee, Tom Watson, accused Mr Murdoch of running a Company that was akin to the Mafia.

This of course followed a prior meeting where Mr Murdoch senior had a foam pie pushed into his face.

That there have been some pretty black deeds carried out at News Corporation seems beyond doubt. However sympathy for the Murdoch’s seems to be growing due to the bloody stupidity of some politicians on the committee – so let’s look a bit closer at two of the protagonists, James Murdoch and Tom Watson, the M.P who has been in the forefront of attempting to nail the Murdoch’s.

James Murdoch is currently serving as Chairman and Chief Executive of News Corporation – he is also Non Executive Chairman of British Sky Broadcasting. He is a British Subject by birth but a naturalised United States Citizen. He is eligible to reclaim Australian Citizenship which he would have lost when his father became a U.S Citizen.

Tom Watson is known in the Commons by his nickname “Tommy two dinners”. He resigned a position in the last Government due to rumours, which still persist, regarding his expenses.

Four members of the West Bromich East M.P’s family also work in politics in jobs paid for by the taxpayer. Together (according to the Sunday Mercury) the five Watsons earn more than £300,000 per year.

Mr Watson’s annual expenses are reported as being the second highest amongst M.P’s in the West Midlands.

In 2006-2007, the latest year for which the figures are available, Mr Watson pocketed the basic M.P’s salary of £60,000. His parliamentry expenses amounted to £150,000 plus – bringing his total to £211,000.

Mr Watson’s wife, Siobhan, works in his constituency office in West Bromich and is paid up to £20,000 per year.

His brother Dan is constituency Director of Euro M.P. Michael Cashman, the Gay activist and former EastEnders actor, earning an estimated £25,000 per year.

Dan Watson’s wife, Joanna’ has no fewer than three jobs paid for by the taxpayer. Like her husband she also works for Mr Cashman and for Labour M.P. Pat McFadden, yet still has time to be a Labour Councillor in Sandwell. It is unclear how much her jobs bring in but they are believed to earn her more than £30,000 per year.

Amy Watson, cousin of Tom and Dan, earns an estimated £21,000 a year working for Birmingham Northfield Labour M.P.Richard Burton.

Their combined earnings mean the estimated total annual cost to the taxpayer is more than £300,000.

A spokeswoman for the West Midlands Labour Party disputed the estimated salary figures and none of the Watson Family have made themselves available for comment.

Right – so what? – you may ask. Simply this. These reports have been coming to light in more force since Mr Watson’s intemperate outburst against Mr Murdoch at the latest Culture Committee meeting.

Once again it seems to me, Politicians, in order to obtain the highest exposure for themselves fail to do their job properly and miss open goals in getting to the truth of serious matters.

Mr Murdoch may well lose his positions at News Corporation and BSKYB or worse. But those that are making enemies of the Murdoch’s for their own short term glory need to beware.

Silly little “Totty” actors who are complaining about having their phones hacked may well find themselves starved of the oxygen of publicity by the Murdoch empire and Politicians with something to hide may find they get more publicity than they wish.

It will be interesting to watch the Drama unfold.

There is a lot of muddled reporting about the crisis facing the Eurozone and in particular some astonishment that the Greeks are calling for a Referendum regarding the latest so called “Bailout”. I worked for and with Greeks for a long period of my life. They are a Great nation with a history steeped in Democracy. It is no surprise to me that the People are being consulted over their continuing involvement in the Euro. In fact, it would have surprised me if they had not. The Greeks were making Democratic Law when most of the Nations now telling them how to behave were wearing animal skins and painting their faces bright blue. What has all this to do with Antiques you may ask? – Simply this. Those that invested in fine Art and Antiques instead of bits of paper backed by worthless promises are better off – those that invested in Gold particularly so. The trend to purchase assets with intrinsic value will continue and strengthen. There is a very good article written by Seumas Milne in the Guardian newspaper on 2nd November which I believe demands a wide audience – I will take the liberty of quoting it here:

“To protect the Banks that lent to Greece and protected it’s elite from unwelcome Tax demands, the Country is being systematically stripped of it’s sovereignty as EU and IMF officials swarm over it’s ministries drafting budgets, setting policy deadlines. “advising” on Tax and pushing through State sellouts.

“No wonder Nationlist anger is growing. And all this to deliver a death spiral of spending cuts and Tax increases that are sending Greece ever deeper into slump and debt. It makes no sense. Unless it is understood that it’s not the Greek economy that is being rescued, but European and US Banks exposed to Greek debt.”

That about sums it up. The Banks lent the money and charged the interest. Also they would have set the terms of the loans. They are about to get stuffed. There are going to be defaults and massive bailouts that may not even then have the desired effect. Financial institutions and individuals are going to be Bankrupted. It is going to be a stormy ride. As ever however, the opportunity to benefit from the eventual restoration of order will be siezed by those with foresight.  The European Auction rooms will be interesting places over the next couple of years.

Four people  (it is reported in this weeks Antique Tade Gazette) have gone on trial in Germany on charges linked to a multi million pound art fraud exposed as a result of sceintific testing on paint. It seems the plot saw a host of well known collectors defrauded over 44 fakes purporting to be by artists including Max Ernst, Heinrich Campendonk and Raoul Dufy amongst others. The case rests in part on some sceintific research puporting to show pigments in the paint that would not have been available to artists at the time the pictures were supposed to have been created. I know I shouldn’t – I really do, but I can’t help a slight snigger when I read about these cases. On the one hand you have collectors (who should really be called investors) buying works of art that they hope will increase in value. On the other side you have a Jack the Lad with bags of talent (probably in some cases a better artist than the original – you try to copy the style exactly of any artist  with enough aptitude to fool the so called experts). What is not understood is how many thousands of paintings hanging on the walls of proud owners have no bearing to the signature on the bottom. For hundreds of years, art faud has been and continues to be a thriving trade. Save yourself the trouble and expense, apparantly there is a bloke in the East End that will do you a perfect copy of any painting (he get’s dodgy about signing the exact signature of the artist as he was once copped and apparantly this is the main offence committed in a fake). But on a serious note – if you are not investing in a picture for monetory gain but to enjoy the painting on your wall, is not a really good copy at a fraction of the price better value? Collectors would disagree, but it may be worth their time being a bit more careful when purchasing. If they were tempted by the price they need to remember the old adage which is particularly relevent to the antiques trade. If it seems too good to be true – it is.