2013 in Books

It turns out that four years of a humanities degree requires a hell of a lot of reading. And, if you're not careful, it'll put you off reading for fun. To try and get back into reading, this year I used Goodreads (which I'd recommend to anyone and everyone!) to set a target of 50 books to read before the year was out. And I did it! Just some interesting stats:

Numbers of new books- 49 (poor Nightwatch was my only re-read!)
Fiction/Non-fiction ratio- 27:23 (ish...)
Longest Book- World Without End, 1237pp
Shortest Book- Sad Book, 8pp
Quickest Read- The Vinland Sagas and The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, one day
Longest Read- The Odyessy, April 29th- Sept 8th
Most Read Author- George R.R. Martin, 5 books and one short story!
Ebooks- Dracula, Mere Christianity and Worlds of Arthur
Useless Fact- Read Dracula on the way to Whitby. There was a thunderstorm my first night there. Was terrified the rest of the holiday!!

Total List:

American Caesars, Nigel Hamilton
A Storm of Swords, Part I: Steel and Snow, George R.R. Martin
A Storm of Swords, Part II: Blood and Gold, George R.R. Martin
Chavs: The Demonisation of the Working Class, Owen Jones
A Feast for Crows, George R.R. Martin
The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes, Arthur Conan Doyle
A Dance with Dragons, Part I: Dreams and Dust, George R.R. Martin
A Dance with Dragons, Part II: After the Feast, George R.R. Martin
Map Addict, Mike Parker
The Verdict: Did Labour Change Britain?, Polly Toynbee and David Walker
The Anglo-Saxon World: An Anthology, Kevin Crossley-Holland
The Folklore of Hertfordshire, Doris Jones-Baker
The Lords of the North, Bernard Cornwell
All the President's Men, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein
The Vinland Sagas: The Norse Discovery of America, Anon.
Time's Anvil: England, Archaeology and the Imagination, Richard Morris
Cameron: Practically a Conservative, Francis Elliott
The Pillars of the Earth, Ken Follett
The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, John Boyne
Snuff, Terry Pratchett
Edward the Confessor, Frank Barlow
What's the Point of School?, Guy Claxton
One Minute to Midnight: Kennedy, Khrushchev and Castro on the Brink of Nuclear War, Mike Dobbs
The Life of Alfred the Great, Asser
The Wild Rover, Mike Parker
England and its Rulers, 1066-1272: Foreign Lordship and National Identity, Michael Clanchy
Swansong, Bernard Cornwell
Sheildwall, Justin Hill
Map of a Nation: A Biography of the Ordnance Survey, Rachel Hewitt
The Honourable Schoolboy, John le Carre
Fatal Path: British Government and Irish Revolution, 1910-1922, Ronan Fanning
Then Everything Changed, Jeff Greenfield
Legends, Robert Silverberg
Burmese Days, George Orwell
Dracula, Bram Stoker
The Odyssey, Homer
Libra, Don De Lillo
World Without End, Ken Follett
Five Days in May: The Coalition and Beyond, Andrew Adonis
Nightwatch, Terry Pratchett
The Historian's Craft, Marc Bloch
Tearing Down the Curtain: The People's Revolutions in Eastern Europe, The Observer
Harvest, Jim Crace
Worlds of Arthur, Guy Halsall
Argo, Antonio Mendez
Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis
Book of Marvels and Travels, Sir John Mandeville
Sad Book, Michael Rosen
Vive La Revolution: A Stand-up History of the French Revolution, Mark Steel
The Road Not Taken: How Britain Narrowly Missed a Revolution, 1381-1926, Frank McLynn

The Wit and Wisdom of... Nelson Mandela

We live with the hope that as she battles to remake herself, South Africa, will be like a microcosm of the new world that is striving to be born.

This must be a world of democracy and respect for human rights, a world freed from the horrors of poverty, hunger, deprivation and ignorance, relieved of the threat and the scourge of civil wars and external aggression and unburdened of the great tragedy of millions forced to become refugees.

The processes in which South Africa and Southern Africa as a whole are engaged, beckon and urge us all that we take this tide at the flood and make of this region as a living example of what all people of conscience would like the world to be.

We do not believe that this Nobel Peace Prize is intended as a commendation for matters that have happened and passed.

We hear the voices which say that it is an appeal from all those, throughout the universe, who sought an end to the system of apartheid.

We understand their call, that we devote what remains of our lives to the use of our country's unique and painful experience to demonstrate, in practice, that the normal condition for human existence is democracy, justice, peace, non-racism, non-sexism, prosperity for everybody, a healthy environment and equality and solidarity among the peoples.

Moved by that appeal and inspired by the eminence you have thrust upon us, we undertake that we too will do what we can to contribute to the renewal of our world so that none should, in future, be described as the "wretched of the earth".3

Let it never be said by future generations that indifference, cynicism or selfishness made us fail to live up to the ideals of humanism which the Nobel Peace Prize encapsulates.

Let the strivings of us all, prove Martin Luther King Jr. to have been correct, when he said that humanity can no longer be tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war.

Let the efforts of us all, prove that he was not a mere dreamer when he spoke of the beauty of genuine brotherhood and peace being more precious than diamonds or silver or gold.

Let a new age dawn!

Receiving the Noble Peace Prize in 1993 alongside F.W. de Klerk for their work in dismantling apartheid.

But Doctor, Haven't We Been Here Before?

A war fought between the most powerful civilisations in the galaxy, dragging in the whole of time and space, distorting reality with paradox after paradox as the war threatens the very fabric of the universe. The most famous hero of the 'good' civilisation refuses to involve himself, choosing instead to keep running as the conflict worsens. As the conflict drags on, those we are supposed to be supporting become ever more brutal in their prosecution of the war. The enemy draws nearer and nearer to victory. Eventually, with them at the gates of the capital, our hero feels forced to intervene. But it's too late. For a man who always saves the day, this is his no-win scenario. In order to stop the victory of his enemies, he is also forced to kill his own people. Double genocide with one hand movement.

But wait! Years later, we discover this was not the end we all thought it was. The hero's home planet has been preserved as a memory of its former self, thanks to previously unknown interventions of said hero. So it turns out he has, once again, snatched victory from the jaws of defeat. Of course, to reclaim it will be hard work, and he barely knows where to begin. But it doesn't matter. He'll get there.

The Doctor never loses.

This is broadly the plot line of the Eighth Doctor Adventures, the BBC Books series published between 1997 and 2005. Any resemblance between this and the 50th anniversary special of Doctor Who is entirely coincidental...

P.S. I'm aware this reveals me as a *massive* sc-fi nerd. Frankly, if you hadn't worked that out by now...

Doctor Who at 50

"I once dreamt that all Time Lords would be like you, that we would explore the universe once more, help those who needed it, destroy those who would destroy. You do good... but perhaps it is as well that you are one of a kind."

Marnal, the second last Time Lord, to the Eighth Doctor, The Gallifrey Chronicles, BBC Books, 2005

Deplorable Words

"It was my sister's fault," said the Queen. "She drove me to it. May the curse of all the Powers rest upon her forever! At any moment I was ready to make peace - yes and to spare her life too, if only she would yield me the throne. But she would not. Her pride has destroyed the whole world. Even after the war had begun, there was a solemn promise that neither side would use Magic. But when she broke her promise, what could I do? Fool! As if she did not know that I had more Magic than she! She even knew that I had the secret of the Deplorable Word. Did she think - she was always a weakling - that I would not use it?"

"What was it?" said Digory.

"That was the secret of secrets," said the Queen Jadis. "It had long been known to the great kings of our race that there was a word which, if spoken with the proper ceremonies, would destroy all living things except the one who spoke it. But the ancient kings were weak and softhearted and bound themselves and all who should come after them with great oaths never even to seek after the knowledge of that word. But I learned it in a secret place and paid a terrible price to learn it. I did not use it until she forced me to it. I fought to overcome her by every other means. I poured out the blood of my armies like water - "

"Beast!" muttered Polly.

"The last great battle," said the Queen, "raged for three days here in Charn itself. For three days I looked down upon it from this very spot. I did not use my power till the last of my soldiers had fallen, and the accursed woman, my sister, at the head of her rebels was halfway up those great stairs that lead up from the city to the terrace. Then I waited till we were so close that we could see one another's faces. She flashed her horrible, wicked eyes upon me and said, "Victory." "Yes," said I, "Victory, but not yours." Then I spoke the Deplorable Word. A moment later I was the only living thing beneath the sun.",

"But the people?" gasped Digory.

"What people, boy?" asked the Queen.

"All the ordinary people," said Polly, "who'd never done you any harm. And the women, and the children, and the animals."

"Don't you understand?" said the Queen (still speaking to Digory). "I was the Queen. They were all my people. What else were they there for but to do my will?"

"It was rather hard luck on them, all the same," said he.

"I had forgotten that you are only a common boy. How should you understand reasons of State?"

The Magician's Newphew, by C.S. Lewis, who (also) died on 22/11/1963. Widely understood to be an analogy for nuclear weapons and the idea of Mutually Assured Destruction.

Nearly Wit and Nearly Wisdom

My friends and fellow citizens: I cite these facts and figures to make it clear that America today is stronger than ever before. Our adversaries have not abandoned their ambitions, our dangers have not diminished, our vigilance cannot be relaxed. But now we have the military, the scientific, and the economic strength to do whatever must be done for the preservation and promotion of freedom.

That strength will never be used in pursuit of aggressive ambitions — it will always be used in pursuit of peace. It will never be used to promote provocations — it will always be used to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes.

We in this country, in this generation, are — by destiny rather than choice — the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of "peace on earth, good will toward men". That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago: "except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain."

Ending of a speech due to be given by US President John F Kennedy in Dallas, Nov 22nd 1963. He was cut down by an assassin's bullet on his way from the airport.

Meeting Nick Clegg

On Tuesday I ran a college trip to Lancaster House, where the Deputy Prime Minister's Office and lots of employers were running an event called Opening Doors, to persuade those still in school that it's not who they know but what they know which will help them succeed in the future.

Needless to say, I had a *field-day*...

1. The woman from Random House publishers may have missed the point of the day when she said to me 'Well, you do seem like the type of person we'd like to have come and work for us... Are you interested?'

2. Thankfully I bit down my response of 'Really, then why didn't you employ me when I applied for a job last year?'

3. I was mistaken for a student more times than I can count.

4. 'Don't bother with going to university, come straight into our apprenticeship scheme!' Thanks, Lloyds, but I've already done four years at university, so thanks for belittling that...

5. Also, I'm not sure taking long term advice from a bank which is mostly owned by the taxpayer, thanks to its lack of long term thinking.

6. Finally, I've never been more proud of the students at my college as I was at the Q&A with Nick Clegg; one of mine got the last question:

So, if you think it's still important we go to university if we want to and can get the grades... why did you go and break your promise on tuition fees?

Apparently the face of every adult in the room froze. Apart from one. I was apparently beaming from ear to ear.

Round Robbins

To devote resources to the training of young people may be, au fond, as much entitled to be considered a process of investment as devoting resources to directly productive capital goods. Judged solely by the test of future productivity, a community that neglects education is as imprudent as a community that neglects material accumulation.

The Robbins Report, or 'the Report of the Committee on Higher Education,' published 50 years this month. Robbins dismissed the idea of financing higher education through loans, and concluded that the opportunity for a university place "should be available to all who were qualified for them by ability and attainment."

The Wit and Wisdom of... Václav Havel

Even a purely moral act that has no hope of any immediate and visible political effect can gradually and indirectly, over time, gain in political significance.

Letter to Alexander Dubček, the Czechoslovakian leader deposed in a 1968 Soviet invasion for attempting to introduce liberalising reforms. The author, playwright and leading dissident Václav Havel, later led the Velvet Revolution which overthrew the Communist regime. From August 1969.

Dangerous Yoofs

I'm trying not to take David Cameron's conference speech too personally. After all, I am currently committing the crime of Being Young. In the not too distant past, I was committing the double crime of Being Young and Not Having a Proper Job. If it wasn't for the fact that I'm clearly delighted with living with my parents, I'd be in for the triple whammy of Trying to Live Away from Home too.

But what I'm really finding hard to stomach is the idea that people 25 or under are hurting the public finances. Excuse me. Not many 25 year olds can proudly say that they helped their boss knock £4 billion pounds off the UK economy, or get their boss to spend £27 billion in propping up the pound. In a single day.

Oh wait Dave, who was Norman Lamont's special advisor on Black Wedesnday?

Oh yes, it was you.

The People You Miss

(Overheard in a North London coffee shop this morning)

Man One: "He was just one of those great guys, you know. Everything was so much better when he was around."

Man Two: "I know. Once he passed away, it was then it all started to go wrong for us. I mean, everyone just fell out big time."

Man One: "Yeah. After Tito died... well, I moved here!"

Tito was the communist leader of Yugoslavia. His death in 1980 eventually led the country to break apart in civil wars in the early 1990s.

Things What Students Say #1

Today I accompanied a history department trip to the British Library so the new Lower Sixth could visit the 'Propaganda: Power and Persuasion' exhibition (which, if you have a free afternoon in London and £9 to spare, is well worth the trip!). They all seemed to really enjoy it, and even possibly learnt something from it.

*However*... for me, the best bit of the trip was listening to the conversation on the tube on the way down:

"If you think about it, why do we really need clothes?"

"I don't understand matching socks. Do you think it's a corporate conspiracy?"

"No, I do think humour is genetic. But only Jewish humour."

"If there was a fire, you'd never get the mattress out my window, so I'd have to use pillows and aim my jump really well..."

"I mean, after a while it was really obvious he was trying to hit on me..." "That'll make things really awkward when he comes to mark your coursework." (Particularly concerned about that one!)

The End of the Post 9/11 World Order

The impotence of the Western world in the face of the chemical weapons attack in Syria has bordered on the farcical. In the Loop has been shown not just to be a satirical throw back to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, it's proved itself prophecy as well. We could well be seeing the end of the post 9/11 world order.

Now hang on, I hear you cry (well I don't, but let's make some presumptions). Surely the post 9/11 world order is alive and kicking? Isn't the USA planning punitive strikes against a Middle Eastern country? With some nasty dictators and Islamist rebels thrown into the mix? How is this any different to everything we've seen since 2001?

It isn't. I'm talking about 9/11 in British English. That is, November 9th. By an amazing coincidence, the world also changed on that date too. Because, on 9/11/1989, the Berlin Wall was breached by thousands of East German protesters, who crossed into West Berlin. There was no better symbol of the collapse of the Communist world than that. The Western world emerged triumphant from that conflict, and the values of the United States reigned supreme. The USA became the world's sole superpower. As a result, it could act however it wanted around the world. For example, the Iraqi regime was subject to American bombing in 1993, 1996 and 1998, before finally being toppled in 2003 by a land invasion. All done with the minimum of lip service to international law, if it was acknowledged at all. The Balkans is another good example. Under the umbrella of NATO, American warplanes pounded Yugoslavia in 1999 in response to attacks on Kosovo. In 1998, cruise missiles truck targets in Sudan and Afghanistan, in response to bombings of American embassies in Africa. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are also cases in point; with Iraq the UN security council specifically forbade the invasion. It still went ahead. It appeared as if the USA could get away with it. No country or body seemed to be able to force them to stop.

It can't be a coincidence that the collapse of America's economic prowess has coincided with the waning of the Pax Americana. Since 2007 the whole capitalist system has been battered and bruised. At the same time, the ability of the US to project its will by force has been in notable decline. The 2011 Libya campaign may well mark the last time the UN security council agrees to back Western military adventurism. A potent mix of imperial overstretch, war-weariness at home, and the increasing assertiveness of countries like Russia and China are coming together to act as a block to the USA. This can be seen over Syria. Not only is the UN security council deadlocked, the US appears very reluctant to proceed at all. It certainly cannot persuade the Russians and Chinese to turn a blind eye as they have done for so long.

The United States remains the most powerful military and economic force in the world. It will continue to use that power as part of its foreign policy. And much of its foreign policy will remain focused on 'The War on Terror' (even if the name has been ditched). In that respect, the post 9/11 world is alive and well. But the nearly quarter of a century in which the United States of America could act as it willed, with no regards for international bodies or the opinions of other countries, appears to be passing. The world born as the Berlin Wall was hacked apart may well be coming to a close.

The Wit and Wisdom of... Robin Cook, Mk. II

The longer that I have served in this place, the greater the respect I have for the good sense and collective wisdom of the British people. On Iraq, I believe that the prevailing mood of the British people is sound. They do not doubt that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but they are not persuaded that he is a clear and present danger to Britain. They want inspections to be given a chance, and they suspect that they are being pushed too quickly into conflict by a US Administration with an agenda of its own. Above all, they are uneasy at Britain going out on a limb on a military adventure without a broader international coalition and against the hostility of many of our traditional allies.

From the start of the present crisis, I have insisted, as Leader of the House, on the right of this place to vote on whether Britain should go to war. It has been a favourite theme of commentators that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics. Nothing could better demonstrate that they are wrong than for this House to stop the commitment of troops in a war that has neither international agreement nor domestic support. I intend to join those tomorrow night who will vote against military action now. It is for that reason, and for that reason alone, and with a heavy heart, that I resign from the Government.

Robin Cook resigning from the government, 17th March 2003. Wherever he is now, I'll bet he's smiling...

The Wit and Wisdom of... James Larkin

Ní uasal aon uasal ach sinne bheith íseal: Éirímis.

The great appear great because we are on our knees: Let us rise.

Extract from a speech by James Larkin, Irish trade unionist who between August 1913 and January 1914 led the strikers in the Dublin Lock-out

The Great Experiment

Sometimes it's not all on the Internets. Since July I've been a subscriber to the New Statesman, an inspired birthday present on the part of my parents. In this week's there is an article on 'Generation Jobless,' and there were some lines which hit right home:

Those young Europeans born in the 1990s, the eldest of whom turned 18 in 2008 and are now aged 23, have been through an experiment that is shared across the continent. It is an experience that young Europeans have not had in common since the austerity and rebuilding of the 1950s, but that was still a time of hope.

In many material ways the young people of Europe are the best-off generation, the first to live all their life with access to the internet, most of them in heated homes with hot running water, well clothed, well fed, and entertained, even many of the poorest. Yet all that means little if you are told repeatedly, having spent a decade and a half in education, that your labour is of no value.

Let us Face the Future

"Quite a number of political parties will be taking part in the coming Election. But by and large Britain is a country of two parties.

And the effective choice of the people in this Election will be between the Conservative Party, standing for the protection of the rights of private economic interest, and the Labour Party, allied with the great Trade Union and co-operative movements, standing for the wise organisation and use of the economic assets of the nation for the public good. Those are the two main parties; and here is the fundamental issue which has to be settled.

The election will produce a Labour Government, a Conservative Government, or no clear majority for either party: this last might well mean parliamentary instability and confusion, or another Election.

In these circumstances we appeal to all men and women of progressive outlook, and who believe in constructive change, to support the Labour Party. We respect the views of those progressive Liberals and others who would wish to support one or other of the smaller parties of their choice. But by so doing they may help the Conservatives, or they may contribute to a situation in which there is no parliamentary majority for any major issue of policy.

In the interests of the nation and of the world, we earnestly urge all progressives to see to it - as they certainly can - that the next Government is not a Conservative Government but a Labour Government"

From the 1945 Labour Party manifesto- on July 26th 1945 Labour was elected in an unprecedented landslide.

My Support for the Muslim Brotherhood

I just want to follow a chain of thoughts through to a conclusion:

1. I voted for the current government (albeit by accident, but that's another story...).

2. I disapprove of the current government's handling of the country.

3. I believe that another government might be able to better run the country.

4. I would like to see the current government removed from office at the earliest possible opportunity.

So far, so good. If opinion polling is to believed (let's not get too carried away with that notion though...) this is what many people in this country think. *HOWEVER*, that doesn't mean that the next step should be:

5. The current government should be removed from power by the army.

I'm quite happy to wait till 2015 to try and get rid of the coalition. I'm also prepared to accept the result of David Cameron still being Prime Minister after 2015, which is fairly likely in my view. To quote John Major:

"There are some times in politics when the ball just rolls in the opposite direction, and there isn't a great deal you can do about it."

For all their enthusiasm for democracy, sections of the Egyptian people, including the army, seem to have missed this key point. Yes, I can see they were frustrated with Mohammed Morsi, who many of them didn't really want in the first place and thought he was doing a terrible job in office. But many people in many countries feel the same about their national leaders. A major part of democracy is accepting the winner has power until the electorate says otherwise. That basic principle has been breached here.

We in the West (whatever that even means) can't apply principles differently by geography. Many in the media and the government in this country seem pleased with Morsi's deposition. Had they been tanks on the streets of France, placing Francois Hollande under house arrest and outlawing the Socialist Party, would we have said "Well, it's a complex situation and we call for all sides to work to reduce tensions?" Like hell would we have.

This country was ruled by soldiers once, nearly 400 years ago. We should be thankful the scars from that experience run so deep it will not happen again. And pity the Muslim Brotherhood. Yes, it made a mess in government. But that doesn't mean it should have had to face down tanks as a result.

The Wit and Wisdom of... Neil Kinnock, Mk II

If Margaret Thatcher is re-elected as prime minister on Thursday, I warn you. I warn you that you will have pain – when healing and relief depend upon payment. I warn you that you will have ignorance – when talents are untended and wits are wasted, when learning is a privilege and not a right. I warn you that you will have poverty – when pensions slip and benefits are whittled away by a government that won’t pay in an economy that can't pay. I warn you that you will be cold – when fuel charges are used as a tax system that the rich don't notice and the poor can't afford.

I warn you that you must not expect work – when many cannot spend, more will not be able to earn. When they don't earn, they don't spend. When they don't spend, work dies. I warn you not to go into the streets alone after dark or into the streets in large crowds of protest in the light. I warn you that you will be quiet – when the curfew of fear and the gibbet of unemployment make you obedient. I warn you that you will have defence of a sort – with a risk and at a price that passes all understanding. I warn you that you will be home-bound – when fares and transport bills kill leisure and lock you up. I warn you that you will borrow less – when credit, loans, mortgages and easy payments are refused to people on your melting income.

If Margaret Thatcher wins on Thursday, I warn you not to be ordinary. I warn you not to be young. I warn you not to fall ill. I warn you not to get old.

Neil Kinnock, Shadow Secretary of State for Education, 7th June 1983. Two days later, Labour slumped to its worst ever election defeat since universal suffrage.

The Best Brians of Our Time

At last, the A-Level exams are nearly over. Soon college can return to normal, with the lower sixth knuckling down to start their A2s, while the upper sixth jet off into the sunset. However, this is where the problems start. They've got to be signed off by all their teachers, and then by us in the library. On the form used, there's a space for what their plans post-college are.

I'm slightly worried for the one planning to study Economics at the University of Exetar...

The Wit and Wisdom of... JFK, Mk II

What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children — not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.

President John F Kennedy, June 1963

All In This Together

It's been a busy day on the BBC. They've had camera crews up and down the country, examining the "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" who've either been elected as UKIP councillors or voted for them. Where this will end today is impossible to tell; and trying to guess how this will affect 2015 and beyond is nigh on impossible. However, I did read one comment today on the BBC news website today which made me wonder what people actually know about UKIP:

Although I have never voted UKIP I find them seductive, despite the loony elements, because they are not part of the establishment... did not all go to the same school and frankly know what a loaf of bread costs.

Of course, it would be uncharitable to ask Nigel Farage, with his public school education, career as a City trader and well reimbursed MEP what he thought about this... so no one has.

P.S. As I write this, the county where I voted in yesterday's local elections remains the only southern English county to not have returned a single UKIP councillor. There's hope for us yet...

What If... The Lib Dems Stood Aside?

If Yorkshire is God's own county, as the locals proudly boast, then the picturesque town of Richmond must be specially blessed; complete with beautiful countryside and ruined castle, it is supremely tranquil, a rural idyll. Which makes it even more surprising that, in 1989, it saw one of the nastiest by-elections of modern British politics. The Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher was suffering from plummeting popularity when the MP for Richmond headed off for Brussels to become an EEC Commissioner. But this was a rock solid Tory seat, and the party had a dream candidate in the form of William Hague, who as a 16 year old had wowed the party conference with his now famous performance. Labour hadn't a hope in hell of winning the seat. What could possibly go wrong?

Enter the new Social and Liberal Democrats, recently formed from the merger of the once mighty Liberal party and the SDP, a group of Labour breakaways. However, the merger of the two parties was not a smooth one, and a 'Continuing SDP' rump under party founder David Owen also put up a candidate in Richmond, local farmer Mike Potter. Polling evidence was clear; the Tories would hold the seat unless either the SLD or the SDP withdrew. And so, after much soul searching, the SLD leader, Paddy Ashdown, ordered his candidate to stand aside. The result; Potter easily won, with 56% of the vote to Hague's 33%. However, Potter's political career was not destined to be long. The SDP collapsed in 1990 after coming behind the Monster Raving Loony Party in another by-election, and then all the former MPs failed to be returned at the 1992 general election. Hague narrowly ousted Potter in Richmond, despite the Liberal Democrats (as the rebranded SLD was calling itself) backing Potter again. Under John Major, the Conservatives were given a record fourth term in office.

Once an MP, Hague's ability and intelligence, not to mention his oratory skill and wit, helped to propel him through the ranks of government, until by 1997 he was the Minister of State for Social Security. He was proving a rare star in a government which was floundering badly, and many had him tipped for Cabinet rank. However it was not to be. Tony Blair's 'New Labour' unleashed an electoral hurricane on John Major's government, which was shattered in the 1997 general election, with Blair leading Labour to an unheard of majority of 179. Major's position as party leader, never very secure, was now totally untenable, so he duly resigned. But who to replace him? many of the heir's apparent had been buried beneath the Labour landslide. The obvious survivor was Ken Clarke. Flamboyant, liked by the public and with a tendency to speak his mind, Clarke had been Major's Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was widely praised for helping to engineer Britain's recovery from the early 90s recession into some of the best economic conditions seen in years. But he was openly pro-European, and for the rump of Tory MPs left in 1997, that was one heresy too far. Some spoke up Hague's chances, or urged backbenchers to stand down for Michael Portillo, the king over the water. Instead, the MPs chose Michael Howard. Major's Home Secretary, famous for his tough stance on law and order, Howard was helped by the endorsement of Mrs Thatcher. Clarke, bitterly disappointed, returned to the backbenches.

Howard was very unfortunate. No Tory leader in the 1997-2001 Parliament would have been able to outwit Blair and return the Conservatives to government. Yet that did not stop him from trying, and for that he needed the best team around him. A mere 165 Tory MPs had been elected, virtually guaranteeing William Hague a seat in the Shadow Cabinet. But even he was surprised with the reward he was given; Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, tasked with taking the fight to Gordon Brown. However, Brown proved a highly successful Chancellor, and, aside from blips such as the fuel crisis of 2000 or the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak, New Labour's popularity remained remarkably intact. Although Howard was able to make some inroads into the Labour vote, the 2001 election produced another massive Labour landslide. Once again, the Conservatives were left with fewer than 200 seats, at 174. Howard resigned, but not before he had ushered in a new method of electing the Conservative leader. The MPs only ballots saw the parliamentary party despatch Clarke and former Maastricht rebel Iain Duncan Smith, leaving Hague and Portillo to face ordinary party members. But, while many MPs felt that Portillo's hour had come, and would successfully appeal to the country at large, out in the Shires his Damascene conversion to modernisation did not go down well. Instead, Hague's more Thatcherite agenda carried the day. Once tipped as a future Prime Minister, Portillo drifted away from mainstream politics, until he defected to the Liberal Democrats, where he now argues for causes such as rail renationalisation.

For Tony Blair, the 2001-2005 Parliament was one dominated by foreign affairs. The security crackdown after 9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan were justified by the enormous well of sympathy, both domestic and international, for the United States, not to mention the fear of further attacks. But it was over Iraq that things became unstuck. Britain joined the Americans in invading amidst howls of protest from the UN, much of the EU, and many across the domestic political spectrum. Once it became clear that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction, even the previously supportive Tories joined the chorus. Blair's domestic agenda of 'public sector reform' stalled throughout 2004 and 2005, as discontent Labour backbenchers made common cause with the Tories and the Lib Dems. Still, the 1997 and 2001 landslides had left the Conservatives with a long, hard road to power, and it was only by the narrowest of margins, a majority of 14, that Hague squeezed to victory in May 2005.

As per their campaign pledges, the new Conservative government began an immediate programme of targeted spending cuts. They also began to scrap some of the more draconian anti-terror legislation brought in by Blair. In the early years, Labour, now led by Gordon Brown, was able to score some notable victories, as the NHS, schools and universities began to feel the squeeze. Labour confidently assumed Hague's focus on cutting the size of the state would trip him up come the next election. But they'd reckoned without the financial crisis which dominated policy from 2007 onwards. The government was able to make the case that the hugely expensive bank recapitalisation rescues were only possible because they had balanced the books in the good years. They also pointed to Brown, who had been the architect of the light touch regulation which many blamed for allowing the crisis to develop. Brown found his attempt to fight the 2009 election on a theme of 'Tory cuts vs. Labour investment' was hopelessly undermined, and he was badly outclassed by Hague on the campaign trail. The Conservatives saw their majority increase to 88. Labour, unable to win even when the government had let the economy go into a severe recession, slid into civil war between Brownites and Blairites.

But from 2009 onwards the problems began for Hague too. Public debt rose on the backs of bank recapitalisation and the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, struggled to find a way to engineer growth in a flat economy whilst further cutting spending. Iain Duncan Smith's welfare reforms, praised at the planning stage, were bitterly criticised as they were actually implemented. Polling showed that the public were increasingly concerned with the excessive use of private companies in the state sector. And one of the Conservative party's biggest backers, News International, was dragged into disgrace through the phone hacking scandal, which also cut short the promising career of former Culture Secretary David Cameron. But William Hague doesn't appear too worried. Labour's civil war saw off one leader, with the popular Alan Johnson throwing in the towel in 2011 as his personal life suffered; few are convinced by his replacement, Harriet Harman. The Liberal Democrats are on shaky ground too, with Nick Clegg struggling to shrug off the disastrous impact of seeing the previous leader thrown in jail for perjury. With polling day for the 2013 election barely a week away, it looks as if Hague is set to emulate his hero, the recently deceased Mrs Thatcher, and win three elections back to back.

P.S.

On the offchance you all thought you were saved, and that I'd stopped blogging, you're not off the hook that lightly! I started a new job in February as a Learning Resources Centre Assistant (to you and I, a librarian) at an FE college in North London. I'll still be putting my mind to the keyboard, just less frequently than before! On the plus side, no moaning about not being employed any more!

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Whether you're on the right, the left, or the muddling middle of British politics, today marks the passing of something. Quite what that was will not be decided today, or tomorrow, or indeed for many years to come. Nearly a quarter of a century after she left office, Margaret Thatcher continues to divide us like no other figures in public life. As both Boudica Reborn and the Wicked Witch of the West, angel and demon.

As much as I'm itching to, as a history graduate who's deeply interested in politics, and has in fact researched the 1970s and 1980s, I'm not going to pass judgement on Mrs Thatcher. I feel that, being born a mere four months before her Cabinet threw her out of office, I'm not best qualified. Reading government papers from the 70s and 80s doesn't compensate in the least for having been there and seen it for myself. However, I don't feel I can let her passing go unmarked. So here is a link to an extract from a superb book, Rejoice, Rejoice! Britain in the 1980s by Alwyn Turner. I think, as summaries of the Thatcher period go, it's fair, and brilliantly written:

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/people/the-iron-lady-what-we-learned-from-thatchers-decade/

But the final words must come from the Lady herself. "It's a funny old world."

The Wit and Wisdom of... Tony Blair, Mk. III

So why does it matter so much? Because the outcome of this issue will now determine more than the fate of the Iraqi regime and more than the future of the Iraqi people who have been brutalised by Saddam for so long, important though those issues are. It will determine the way in which Britain and the world confront the central security threat of the 21st century, the development of the United Nations, the relationship between Europe and the United States, the relations within the European Union and the way in which the United States engages with the rest of the world. So it could hardly be more important. It will determine the pattern of international politics for the next generation.

Tony Blair, appealing to the House of Commons to back the impending war with Iraq, 18th March 2003.

The Wit and Wisdom of... Robin Cook

The longer that I have served in this place, the greater the respect I have for the good sense and collective wisdom of the British people. On Iraq, I believe that the prevailing mood of the British people is sound. They do not doubt that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but they are not persuaded that he is a clear and present danger to Britain. They want inspections to be given a chance, and they suspect that they are being pushed too quickly into conflict by a US Administration with an agenda of its own. Above all, they are uneasy at Britain going out on a limb on a military adventure without a broader international coalition and against the hostility of many of our traditional allies.

Robin Cook, resigning from the Labour government over the impending invasion of Iraq, 17th March 2003

The Wit and Wisdom of... Robert Baden-Powell, Mk. II

No one can pass through life, any more than he can pass through a bit of country, without leaving tracks behind, and those tracks may often be helpful to those coming after him in finding their way.

Lord Robert Baden-Powell of Gilwell, Chief Scout of the World, 1940.

Why Do We Teach History?

As regular readers of this blog will know, I'm a history graduate. Twice. And, for reasons we don't have time for here, I've hit a glass ceiling with regards to taking this further. Suffice to say that not quite good enough grades, a university funding crisis of incredible proportions and a blue-sky idea of dubious proportions have got in the way.

So, this week I'm going back to square one. I'm going into the history department at my old secondary school, to see whether I'd consider teaching history as a job. At the moment, I'm not sure. If it proves to be more than Hitler and Henry VIII (both baffling to an Anglo-Saxonist such as myself), I'll be willing to give it a fair hearing.

But this begs the question: Why is history taught in schools? A vexing question, and I've heard a variety of answers:

• It helps you learn from the past- Really. Well, thank God we learnt from our defeat in Afghanistan in the early nineteenth century, or the Soviet invasion in 1979-89 and never joined the American attacks of 2001, otherwise we'd still be bogged down there too... As for this non-repeat of the Great Depression we're currently experiencing... financial bubbles and crashes are nothing new either!
• It makes you a better citizen to know the past- Because trying to make a group of perfect citizens has never backfired in the past... 
• It's interesting- To quote Captain Edmund Blackadder: "Baldrick, I find the Great Northern and Metropolitan Sewage System interesting, but that doesn't mean that I want to put on some rubber gloves and pull things out if it with a pair of tweezers." 

These questions are hampered by the way history is taught, at least here in the UK. The Greeks fought Persia with 300 men, then the Romans invade Britain using their togas before Henry VIII dissolved their monasteries, while the Spanish Armada was defeated by his daughter Victoria who then evacuated people from the cities during the Blitz...

So much is missing. The Anglo-Saxon period, when the English actually arrived on these shores, and modern England was born against the backdrop of the Viking onslaught, whilst the rest of the Middle Ages, 1066 aside, only get a look in as Richard III is going down at Bosworth Field. The story of the Tudors is promoted over that of the Stuarts, a royal family so bad that Parliament was twice forced to remove the monarch by force of arms. Britain's struggle with France, from the 100 Years War through to the final showdown with Napoleon, the dark legacy of colonialism, the war which gave birth to a country which one day would stand as the self appointed leader of the free world, not to mention coming to our aid in our moment of direst need, the Industrial Revolution... If we truly seek to answer the question of Scottish nationalism's calls for independence, shouldn't we teach the example of the only entity to have successfully left the United Kingdom, Ireland? The list goes on. As for international history, Hitler, Stalin, and America after 1900 rule supreme. I was lucky. For A-Level, my international history was the European Reformation, Ottoman Turkey and such. But most British school-leavers couldn't tell you about the Reich which really did last 1000 years, only the one which promised to and failed (The Holy Roman Empire, if you're wondering).

Anyway, what is the point in teaching history in our schools? Put simply, it's what used to be called the historical method. Source analysis is central to all that historians do. Jeremy Paxman is often, wrongly, attributed to have said to think "Why is this lying bastard lying to me?" when interviewing a politician. This is the same way the historian approaches their sources. Yet proper source analysis is rare before degree level. This ability to evaluate something and really get to the bottom of what it's really saying is far more useful than knowing what measures Hitler brought in to suppress internal dissent in Nazi Germany, or the problems endured by Æthelred 'the Unready' in the tenth and eleventh centuries. To then be able to explain why you think something to be correct based on viable evidence is also a really crucial life skill. One of my old lecturers said he could only think of two such societies where no one thought like that; Nazi Germany and the USSR. He was being flippant, but the point still stands. And to turn from historical villains to modern ones, I once heard a senior RBS Executive saying he wished he had more history graduates and fewer economics graduates coming to him for a job. (exact circumstances can be found here: http://inaneramblingsofahistorystudent.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/i-agree-with-ed.html). Now there's a tantalising what if for you...

And if all else fails, the joke about King John losing the crown jewels in the Wash is the definitive argument...

P.S. I actually wrote this on Sunday night. Yesterday, I was sat in a Year 8 (12-13 years old) history lesson watching the live feed from the Richard III conference at Leicester. When the dig team announced it was his body they'd unearthed, all the children broke into spontaneous applause. Maybe I didn't need to be so worried about history after all!

What If... Bryan Gould Became Labour Leader in 1992?

For anyone on the left in Britain, the 1992 election strikes fear into their heart. Over twenty years on, the shock still hasn't worn off. The Conservative party, despite trailing in the polls, leadership turmoil, a severe recession and thirteen years in government, had pulled off another election victory. To make matters worse, John Major had the largest popular mandate ever recorded, with over 14 million votes to his name. For Labour, this was worse than bad. It was crushing. They would now be out of office until 1996 at least, making for seventeen or even eighteen years in the wilderness. Neil Kinnock, leader since 1983, resigned. He had done more than anyone to transform Labour from battered entity in 1983 into a party capable of taking power. But it apparently wasn't enough.

The smart money in the ensuing leadership election was on John Smith, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, becoming the new Labour leader. He had been seen as a viable, maybe even a better, alternative to Kinnock since the late eighties, and now his hour looked like it had come. But there was another candidate lurking in the wings. Bryan Gould, the Shadow Environment Secretary. The MP for Dagenham since 1983, and before that an MP in Southampton, Bryan Gould was a favourite of the old 'soft left,' and indeed benefited from the secret support of Kinnock. But Smith still looked the sure bet. That is, until Kinnock, still liked in the party despite taking it to two landslide defeats, went public with this support. The whole contest was thrown into disarray, and Gould unexpectedly, but decisively, emerged as the winner.

After his convincing win, the first thing Gould had to do was build a strong Shadow Cabinet. He was aided in this by the decision of John Smith to return to the backbenches, rather than provide an alternative leader for dissent to build around. His tragic death in 1994 after a heart attack ended speculation of a Gouldite-Smithite split which could have dogged any new government. With a good head for economics, Gould was able to take the fight to John Major's government. Sterling's dramatic exit from the ERM in September 1992 was an early coup, as Gould was opposed to membership. In fact, his mild Euroscepticism was a huge bonus in the years ahead, as he was able to take the lead on making common cause with the Tory's European Rebels to hinder Major's attempt to ratify the Maastricht Treaty. His strong Shadow Cabinet also helped enormously. Gould put Frank Dobson at the Treasury, whose sharp wit made mincemeat of Norman Lamont and led to electric battles with Ken Clarke across the despatch box. Robin Cook was moved into the foreign affairs brief, where he put Major's government under incredible pressure over the sale of arms to Iraq and the Bosnia fiasco. Meanwhile, Jack Straw shadowed home affairs, the only example where Gould enabled Labour to come at the Tories from the right. The two chief modernisers, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, were given middle ranking roles, enough to put them in the limelight, but not enough to enable them to drive through some of the fundamental changes they wanted.

When John Major finally went to the polls on May 1st 1997, Gould was in a good position to be the first Labour leader to oust a sitting Tory Prime Minister since Harold Wislon in 1974. However, even he later admitted to being shocked at the result. Labour took a crushing 401 seats to Major's 182; with the Liberal Democrats seizing 46 seats and the others mopping up the remaining 30 seats. The majority of 143 was the same as Mrs Thatcher had in 1983, and was just short of that achieved by Clement Attlee in 1945. Speaking at the victory rally in Festival Hall, the new Prime Minister promised:

The expectation of this Labour government is, that it will restrict the growth of untrammelled economic power. It will ensure that political power is equally shared – that the democratic process is maintained in good shape and that human and civil rights are protected. It will allow less powerful people to organise themselves so that their collective strength can protect them against the economic force of powerful individuals and groupings. It will guarantee the basic decencies of life to all in society, irrespective of their power or lack of it in the market-place, so that their life-chances are not arbitrarily restricted. It will develop the cohesion of society so that communities as well as individuals have a role to play and enjoy a stake in its success.

Bryan Gould didn't waste a moment. On the very first day, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, Frank Dobson, gave the Bank of England the independence to set interest rates, providing they also focused on keeping a brake on the excess of the City of London. Dobson was also quick to raise taxes on higher rate earners, to fund spending on schools and healthcare. Better to get it over with, years before the next election. Michael Meacher at the Health Department put a halt to the NHS internal market, and began to pump money into the system to reverse years of underinvestment. Meanwhile, Blair, now Education Secretary, slashed primary school class sizes and began to oversee a vast building programme. However, tinkering with the curriculum was met coolly by teachers, and Gould refused to accept Blair's case for the introduction of tuition fees to fund university education; the money instead came from an extra penny on income tax, an idea the Liberal Democrats were cross to see stolen from under them. A windfall tax on the utility companies which Major and Thatcher had privatised helped to reduce unemployment, while John Prescott's renationalisation of British Rail was achieved by simply waiting for the privatised franchises to expire. Gordon Brown began a programme to support British business, promoting "British jobs for British workers" and helping to restore much of the manufacturing capacity which had been gutted under Thatcher. Mo Mowlan won glowing praise for helping Gould to force through a peace deal for Northern Ireland, achieved on St Andrews Day in 2000, whilst devolution in Scotland and Wales were also carried through. Abroad, Robin Cook was the face for an "ethical foreign policy," causing his standing to rise even further as Britain took a key role in Kosovo, Sierra Leone and the aerial bombardment of Iraq, although he and Gould visibly clashed over the issue of Europe, where Gould refused to allow Britain to join the Euro. Given how that turned out, we should be grateful.

But with fifteen years hindsight, it is easy to remember only the big things. Virtually forgotten now is the huge row over the Millennium celebrations, culminating in the cancellation of a bizarre project inherited from the Conservatives which would have seen a giant tent erected on reclaimed land in the London Docklands. The extra money was split between putting on a decent fireworks display on the Thames and increased investment in public services. And not all of the term was rosy; the foot and mouth crisis caused a huge dent in the government's popularity, as did the fuel protests of 2000 and the apparent waste of the higher tax takings, while the move to ban fox hunting stalled amidst terrible clashes with rural England. And the government's own natural supporters weren't all impressed, with the TUC lobbying for the return of more trade union powers, calls sensibly ignored.

Yet despite these crises, and a strong challenge in Parliament from new Conservative leader, Ken Clarke, there was little public appetite for a return for the Tories, enabling Gould to win the 2001 election with a majority of 97. Very quickly, the old world was changed forever after September 11th. The re-elected Prime Minister threw Britain's support behind the US in the aftermath of the attacks, and sent British troops to Afghanistan. However, as the Iraq Crisis of 2002 dragged on, it became clear that Gould would not be the Prime Minister to deal with it. By revealing that he intended to retire by 65, he sparked immediate calls in the Labour party for him to leave now and give his successor time to settle in before an election in 2005 or 2006. Many were worried by the threat posed by the new Tory leader William Hague, and they figured Labour needed a popular and effective leader to take the fight to the Tories. Surprisingly, that figure was not the heir-apparent, embattled Education Secretary Tony Blair, but rather a Scottish left-winger who combined a command of detail with a strong party background. Robin Cook will be remembered best as the Prime Minister who refused to back "Dubya's" war in Iraq, and who helped steer Britain through the economic storm of the Great Recession, although even he could never have foreseen that introducing proportional representation would lead to the creation of a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition in 2009. And as much as he'd never give to admit it, David Cameron's fate at the 2013 election is also a legacy of Bryan Gould's remarkable period in office, as his hopes for recovery are pinned on the manufacturing industries and social support structures built during the Gould years.

P.S. Gould Cabinet, 1997

Prime Minister- Bryan Gould
Chancellor of the Exchequer- Frank Dobson
Foreign Secretary- Robin Cook
Home Secretary- Jack Straw
Defence Secretary- George Robertson
Education and Employment Secretary- Tony Blair
Health Secretary- Michael Meacher
Trade and Industry Secretary- Gordon Brown
Social Security Secretary- David Blunkett
Transport Secretary- John Prescott
Environment Secretary- David Clark
International Development Secretary- Clare Short
Families and Equality Secretary- Harriet Harman
Arts, Media and Sport Secretary- Chris Smith
Scottish Secretary- Donald Dewar
Welsh Secretary- Alun Michael
Northern Irish Secretary- Mo Mowlam
Chief Secretary to the Treasury- Alistair Darling
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Minister- Gavin Strang
Minister Without Portfolio- Jack Cunningham
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Deputy Prime Minister- Margaret Beckett
Leader of the House of Commons- Ann Taylor
Leader of the House of Lords- Lord Richard
Lord Chancellor- Lord Irvine
Attorney General- John Morris
______________________________________________________________________

This post has been a long time in the making, and I've rewritten it several times. Credit should be given to:

• Alwyn Turner, whose excellent blog can be found at http://alwynwturner.blogspot.co.uk, for suggesting this counterfactual. Otherwise, you'd probably have just read all about John Smith and his time at No 10.
• My friend Tom, whose interest and knowledge of modern Britain, it's politics and the Labour party helped get me going on this (I would have named you Tom, but now you're a trainee civil servant I'm not sure I'm allowed to!).
• John Smith: A Life by Mark Stuart (London, Politico, 2005); the chapters on the 1992 Labour leadership were especially useful in finding out how this scenario could actually have come about.
• Bryan Gould's website, which can be found at http://www.bryangould.net. The 'victory speech' was an edited version of an article found there from 2006/07, and all the rest of the articles leave you wondering what a really radical Prime Minister could have pulled off in 1997-2001, or indeed during 2007-2010.

The Wit and Wisdom of... Maggie Thatcher

It is a myth that the Community is simply a bureaucracy with no concern for the individual.

The entire staff of the Commission is about 7,000—smaller than that of the Scottish Office.

It is a myth that our membership of the Community will suffocate national tradition and culture.

Are the Germans any less German for being in the Community, or the French any less French? Of course they are not!

It seems to me to display an amazing lack of self-confidence in Britain on the part of some people, that they think that, whereas no other nation in the Community has lost its national character, Britain in some way will.

These points and others must be answered—on the public platform—on the doorstep.

When referendum day comes there may be some who do not want to vote. But no one can opt out of this decision. It is a decision that will affect us all. It is a decision that will affect future generations.

It is a decision in which all should participate to secure our future in a free society.

We must act to defend our children's future as those generations before us acted to protect ours.

For hundreds of years the peoples of Britain have been writing history. Do we want future generations to continue to write history or are they simply going to have to read it.

If we fail, they will read how we broke faith with both the present and the past.

If we fail and the British people vote ‘No’ to the European Community, they will read how there was a defeat for co-operation between nations, and how there was a victory for the tribunes of the Left.

They will read how extremism won over commonsense. For it is purely common sense to belong to a community working together in peace on economic and political issues that concern us all.

It is purely commonsense to have access to secure sources of food supplies, when as a nation we have to import half our food.

It is surely commonsense to belong to the Community that is the largest trading and aiding unit in the world, and play our part in that Community.

It is surely commonsense for Britain to continue to play a part in the Council of Europe.

It is purely commonsense that we should now listen also to the Commonwealth—those Nations who twice this century, have come to Britain's aid to defend democracy in Europe.

Not one of them now want us to leave. The Commonwealth wants us to stay in. Britain has made a vital contribution to the past. She has a contribution to make to the future. It will be bigger in Europe than alone

Leader of the Opposition Margaret Thatcher, making a speech to the Conservative Group for Europe, 16th April 1975. Thatcher advocated a Yes vote.

The Wit and Wisdom of... Abraham Lincoln

With malice toward none, with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan — to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations.

Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address, 4th March 1865

Why Yes Minister May Have Been Right About the Civil Service...

All applications for these vacancies must be made on-line. There are limited exceptions to this. Paper applications will only be considered if you have a disability that will prevent you from applying on-line. If this is the case, please email CivilServiceJobs@dfid.gov.uk

If anyone can spot the rather obvious flaw in this sentence, they should be employed by the civil service to root out stupid errors and blatant contradictions...

The Wit and Wisdom of... Lech Wałęsa

It is hardly possible to build anything if frustration, bitterness and a mood of helplessness prevail

Lech Wałęsa, Chairman of Solidarity and later President of Poland, accepting his Noble Peace Prize in absentia, 1983.

The Wit and Wisdom of... John Major, Mk. II

I am walking over hot coals suspended over a deep pit at the bottom of which are a large number of vipers baring their fangs

John Major, on forcing the Maastricht Treaty through Parliament and the Conservative Party, October 1992.