Rod Liddle

Rod Liddle

Rod Liddle is associate editor of The Spectator.

Sorry, Ken, but even I know you can’t say that

This week I thought I would offer advice on the sort of things one can and cannot say in public without fear of censure. I realise that I may not be the most obvious person, at this moment in time, to offer such a service. Maybe even the last person. But one has to plough away, give help where it might be needed. And in this particular case, to our Justice Secretary, Kenneth Harry Clarke. So Ken — here’s the last thing you should ever say in public. You should never, ever, as a suffix to a statement, make the claim: ‘And most women agree with me.

The Guardian’s standards continue to amaze

The Guardian has retracted one of the allegations it made about me in its strangely humour-free Pass Notes section on Monday. They said that I had described a footballer as a 'spearchucking African', whereas I was quoting what had allegedly been said about the footballer by somebody else and using that quote to justify the black footballer's consequent aggressive reaction. So, they put in a retraction today, although devoid of an apology. I might work through the rest of the Pass Notes and get them to retract most of the rest.

I was wrong on riot sentencing

People sometimes ask me, about the stuff I write: 'Do you ever think that you get it wrong?' The answer of course is a fervent 'Yes!' And even when I don't actually KNOW that I've got something wrong, I'm always plagued with doubt about it. One thing I got wrong recently was the riots. Or more properly, my take on what happened to the people prosecuted for their parts in the riots. I think I remember being gung-ho for long sentences, sentences out of all proportion to the crimes actually committed, bang 'em up, ne’er do well trash. I suppose, like a lot of people, I was swallowed by a recriminatory mood occasioned by the anger the riots provoked in me. But it was bad call, a wrong call.

What is it with the critics and Ricky Gervais?

I’ve had a sense of humour failure, in that I find something funny which nobody else does, apparently. I’ve been watching Ricky Gervais’s new comedy, Life’s Too Short, and thought the first episode, in particular, was hilarious. But people really hate Gervais, don’t they? I haven’t yet read a decent review of the programme and yet it’s probably funnier than anything else on our screens that’s new. This seems to get missed. My Sunday Times colleague, AA Gill, kicked the living hell out of the programme last week in typically elegant and cutting fashion, for example.

The right punishment for the wrong reasons

The Sepp Blatter business is interesting, an example of a very modern, very 'now' process. That is, the comeuppance arriving for the wrong reason, but the politically correct reason. The most obvious example in the last ten years or so was the shooting of Jean Charles De Menenez on the tube at Stockwell station. The Met Police were criminally incompetent, and there were many claims that they lied after the event to the press. What they got done for in the end, though – surreally – was an infraction of health and safety procedure. And so we have Sepp Blatter, presiding over a corrupt cabal of delegates. Authoritarian and undemocratic – his recent re-election would have made Brezhnev blush.

Go on, Sarko, tell us another

The typical cowardice of French journalists has prevented us from knowing the full details of that off-the-record chat between Nicolas Sarkozy and President Barack Obama — until now. Hitherto we had to make do with Sarkozy’s rather boring attack upon the Israeli leader Benyamin Netanyahu: ‘I cannot bear Netanyahu, he is a liar.’ To which Obama replied: ‘You’re fed up with him? I have to deal with him even more than you.’ Well, so far, so so-so. It is an exchange which will certainly have Netanyahu laughing his head off, largely on account of Obama’s connivance (I don’t suppose he could give a monkey’s what Sarkozy thinks about anything, any more than the rest of us should).

May’s a goner

That's it for Theresa May, isn't it? I realise that Cameron is loathe to lose the woman, especially so recently after having (with rather less anguish) lost Dr Fox. But it seems to me, from what I've read, that the case against her seems fairly watertight. Brodie Clark will go to court and sooner or later, through fair means or foul, we will have the written or electronic communications between the two of them in our hands. The fact we haven't now suggests to me that May is in trouble. The Home Office is a graveyard for all politicians, of course, but especially so for Conservatives, who find themselves up against an institutionalised liberal establishment.

Cars and fireworks

I see the poor bloke who organised the rugby club firework display near the M5 is being pilloried. The Daily Mail, in particular, was anxious to fling the blame at someone for the appalling pile-up on the motorway which left seven people dead. It immediately alighted upon the fact that there had been a firework display nearby and that perhaps smoke had drifted onto the road. Just wait until next October, and the same paper will be doing the usual why-oh-why pieces about how "elf n safety lunatics" have forced people to cancel their firework displays; you couldn't make it up, we're heading to hell in a handcart guv. The motorway crash was both shocking and terrifying and makes me glad I don't drive.

How do you lose 124,000 people?

I see that the UK Border Agency has "lost" 124,000 asylum seekers and immigrants. It has done this in exactly the same way in which I deal with begging letters from Cancer Research and that charity that wants you to help the little foreign girl with no lips. Unwilling, out of embarrassment and shame, to just put them straight in the bin, I "file" them in a small tray at the back of my office from where, six months later, my wife puts them in the bin. This is exactly what the UK Border people do. They call it a "controlled archive", a place where all these cases are kept for six months and then thrown in the bin.

Organised protest? Mass alfresco sulk, more like

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has at last spoken on the issue of the great St Paul’s Cathedral controversy, which has so far seen the departure of both the Dean of the cathedral and its canon. Dr Williams lamented the loss to the church of both men but added that the ‘issues’ raised by the protesters outside the church ‘remain very much on the table’. So not just on the table, but very much on the table. Somewhere near the centre of the table, perhaps, just to the left of the candlestick. Dr Williams did not describe the table at all, but I have taken the liberty of assuming it is a large and robust wooden table, with a leg at each corner. But what are these important issues, then?

Oi, Young and Delingpole — don’t be so precious

Wow — two pieces in the mag this week from journalists whining about people being beastly to them on social networking sites. The first, from James Delingpole, correctly identifies Twitter as being characterised by “suppurating vileness”. Yes, that would be right. So why do it? James is a good mate and while we have certain intense political differences — him being further to the right than a fish knife — he’s one of the few honest monkeys plying their trade in this vapid and self-centred world. It is frankly beneath him to whine about being attacked. Hell, I’m sure the two of us had a good chortle when the immensely self-regarding idiot Yasmin Alibhai Brown whined about how horrid people were to her a couple of years back.

A lesson from the Premier League in what’s truly offensive

What is the appropriate sort of language, do you suppose, for the captain of the England football team to use in respect of his colleagues? This is an important issue and I, for one, will not sleep until a sort of resolution — a closure, if you will — has been arrived at. Because we have a dispute on our hands and at the heart of it is a moral issue. Needless to say, the police are investigating. It is alleged that the present England captain, Mr John Terry, of Chelsea FC, addressed his opponent, Mr Anton Ferdinand, of Queens Park Rangers, with the wholly unacceptable words ‘you f***ing black c***’. Mr Terry, for his part, has strenuously denied saying such a thing and insists it was simply the anodyne and perfectly inoffensive ‘you f***ing blind c***’.

Misplaced outrage

I think my favourite story of the day concerned the theatre-goers at Stratford-upon-Avon who were outraged that the play they had just seen contained considerable amounts of sex, violence and depravity. The play was Marat/Sade. You'd think the "Sade" bit might have given them a bit of a clue, wouldn't you? It's a bit like me marching back to Blockbusters with my copy of Lesbian Lavatory Lust complaining that it consisted of little more than ninety minutes of rug munching and a particularly grotesque scene with a toilet duck. It would be too much to expect these theatre goers to have had an awareness of this old warhorse of a sixties play. Theatre has become such a comfortable bourgeois past-time, a displacement activity for cooking Tuscan Lamb with gratinated fennel.

The King strikes back

Good to see Jonathan King winning his battle with the Stalinist BBC. The corporation had edited him out of a rerun of a 1970s Top of the Pops show, as if he had never existed. As those of us of a certain age know all too well, Mr King was an extremely regular performer on the show during that time, either as himself or under a number of disagreeable disguises: the Piglets and Sakkarin to name but two. Indeed, when King was sentenced to seven years in prison for sex crimes I wrote to him sympathising with the harshness of the tariff and the unfairness of the court case, but added that I thought he deserved at least seven years for 'Una Paloma Blanca'. I got a remarkably cheerful letter back from his cell which vaguely agreed on the last point.

The Gaddafi Memorial Quiz

In order to commemorate the death of Colonel Gaddafi properly, here’s a quiz about various deceased (with one exception) murderous megalomaniacs. No googling, or I’ll boil you in a vat for supper. Answers later today. 1. Which Muslim headcases wrote the following novels: a) Escape To Hellb) Begone Demons! 2. According to a popular conspiracy theory, from whose frozen semen was German Chancellor Angela Merkel created? 3. Who ordered The Night of the Murdered Poets? 4. Which friend of ol’Muammar may well have served up his other friend, Giscard D’Estaing, with poached loin of human being at a presidential dinner? 5.

A town like Orania

Here’s a conversation I had with an elderly Afrikaaner lady (EAL) in the main street of the whites-only town, Orania, in South Africa. Me: Hello, do you live here? EAL: No, but I am thinking of moving here. Me: Why would you want to do that? EAL: There is no crime here, it is secure. The people are friendly and welcoming, and the shops are good. Me: There’s also a complete and utter absence of black people. EAL (jabbing her finger into my chest): Yis! And lit me tell you. That is the best thing of all! That is the best thing in the world! More snapshots from this neck of the woods when the film is finished. It is a peculiar and complex issue. And made so by a potent combination of political correctness, paranoia and racism.

Foxy goings on

Greetings from South Africa, where I am in the township of Orania making a film (hence my radio silence for a few days). Orania is a somewhat right-of-centre Afrikaans-only settlement; more about it in the future. One of the interesting wild animals out here in the Karoo is the Bat-Eared Fox, which is – suitably enough – handsome and endangered. That, anyway, is my cumbersome link into the issue which has apparently gripped Britain since my departure: the former Defence Secretary and his strange friend Mr Werritty whom, some allege, may be an agent of Mossad, and who may also be an afficianado of buggery according to the implied slurs of others.

Some suggestions about how the BBC management can save money

Do you have any idea what a decision support analyst actually does for a living? This is a controversial topic because the chief operating officer of the BBC, a woman called Caroline Thomson, was unable to answer the question as to what her own decision support analysts did while they were at work. Truth be told, I’m not sure what a chief operating officer does either, although as Ms Thomson’s salary is in the region of £385,000 a year it is clearly something that should occupy my thoughts more frequently. Isn’t the director general of the BBC, Mark Thompson, by definition also the chief operating officer?

My American commentator of choice

I don’t know what source you use for your news from the US. Some will trust the BBC or Fox, two sides of the same coin. The more achingly modern will go for blogs and stuff. I trust none of it and rely entirely upon No Name Gene, who I met in a bar in Sausalito twenty years ago. Gene is a Chicagoan of Polish extraction deposited in a houseboat in the Bay. We meet up now and again to drink, smoke and enjoy what I suppose you might call civilised conversation, at the bar from which Gene received his lack of a name: The No Name. There’s always someone interesting in the place.

Here’s how the Beeb might save some cash

Good point made by Charlie Brooker in today’s Guardian. If the BBC wishes to save a bit of money without affecting quality of output —indeed, by improving it — the corporation should stop making vastly expensive trailers for its forthcoming programmes. Brooker says it “turns him silver with rage” when he sees these specially shot montages: “It’s like watching the BBC shit money into a big glittery bin.” Quite right. If I were a better journalist I’d have added up the number of minutes per hour which the BBC gives over to advertising itself and compare it with the figure from 10, 20 and 30 years ago. I am absolutely certain it has increased dramatically.