Rod Liddle

Swathed in ermine, carried into the Chilcott Inquiry on a giant litter borne aloft by naked research assistants, and chewing a Lion Bar, Lord Prescott told the world he’d always been a bit, uh, nervous about the invasion of Iraq. Nice of you to share that with us now, John, many thanks. And also the fact that you were “surprised” at how “insubstantial” some of the reports on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction really were. That would have been nice to know at the time, too. The insinuation is that he was against the war but stood by his leader out of loyalty. I’m sure the Iraqis and the dead British soldiers are appreciative of that loyalty, your lordship.

There is a letter in the latest edition of the magazine scolding my good friend James Delingpole for being rude about Prince Charles. The letter concludes like so: “The wording is intemperate and cowardly and shames The Spectator.” As I remember, James, with a certain flair, had simply pointed out that Prince Charles was a bit of a dingbat, all things considered. I thought this was a view shared by everyone, including Charles’s mum. But anyway, that’s not why I bring the matter up. The letter is signed: Lord Remnant, Henley-on-Thames. Lord what? Lord Remnant? I immediately assumed that this was someone playing a joke on James, someone who had read too much Wodehouse.

I accept that this thread follows a little uncomfortably from my previous thread – I mean, if ever there was a happy challenge to the stereotype then this is it. Peter Tatchell has just received an honorary doctorate from Sussex University, for his services to human rights etc. Good, so he should, few deserve the accolade more. In his acceptance speech he said the following: "Be sceptical, question authority, be a rebel. All human progress is the result of far-sighted people challenging orthodoxy, tradition and powerful, vested interests. Don't accept the world as it is. Dream about what the world could be - then help make it happen. In whatever field of endeavour you work, be a change-maker for the upliftment of humanity.

A powerful editorial in New Scientist about Muir Russell’s report into those emails leaked from East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit. It does not quite call Russell’s publication a whitewash, but comes fairly close. Its main point of contention is that there have been three inquiries into the Climategate farrago and “incredibly, none looked at the quality of the science itself.” Russell hammered CRU for its secrecy but upheld the integrity of the researchers there. However, in failing to examine the quality of the science, the editorial continues:  “How can we know whether CRU researchers were properly exercising their judgment?

A couple of weeks back I wrote a piece for the magazine about the debate over the Schonrocks, a family living in south London who allowed their two children – aged five and eight years – to cycle to school unaccompanied. The school had told them to desist from this practice because it was dangerous. It seemed to me commendable of them. Now, in the papers, we read of a child who was left behind at a service station whilst on holiday with his mum and dad in Switzerland. Shock horror. The little mite spent two hours “being cared for” by service station staff before his parents remembered that they had a son and came back to get him. All front page news. The child was TWELVE years old.

Just a quick one: who do you think is the more truly fucking stupid, the legions of thick Geordies who have signed the Facebook campaign claiming that Raoul Moat was a “legend”, or the outgoing chair of Ofsted Zenna Atkins, who said that it was good for schools to have incompetent or useless teachers because it taught kids how to deal with incompetent adults? I’ve written about “Moaty” (© Paul Gascoigne) in the mag this week; suffice to say 18,000 imbeciles have joined the campaign to commemorate His Life and Works, firing off illiterate comments about “the filth” and “the pigs” and the “system”.

I read Dan Hannan’s blog about the recent Spectator debate in which we argued about whether or not Britain was so completely knackered that we all ought to leave the place right now. I thought we should, Dan thought we should hang around for a bit longer. Anyway, on his blog Dan made reference to the fact that pretty much all of the other speakers were lefties…..'Or at least four of them were Lefties: Rod Liddle’s politics are as hard to define as Puck’s.' I assume that’s a Shakespearian reference and not a misprint. It’s not every day you get called a fairy by a politician you admire, so I thought I’d address the point, as I hear the same sort of sentiment expressed quite often.