PETER HITCHENS: Don't hope for too much from the chilly commissars who'll control Starmergrad
And ghastly, thro' the drizzling rain, on the bald street breaks the blank day', or so wrote Alfred, Lord Tennyson on another occasion. It certainly seemed fitting as I biked through the suburbs on Friday morning, contemplating 20 years of dwelling in Starmergrad, if I make it that far.
We are told that we should give 'losers' consent' when people we don't like win democratic elections, and I agree that it is the only civilised thing to do.
But I can't actually remember an election when I did not have to give at least a bit of loser's consent. A bit of winner's gloating, as enjoyed by the other side, would be fun. But in this case, who are the winners and who is gloating?
Bridget Phillipson's supporters greet the moment of her victory with clenched-fist salutes, as if she was off to fight in the Spanish Civil War
I noticed something interesting at the victory of Bridget Phillipson MP at Houghton and Sunderland South. Her supporters greeted the moment with clenched-fist salutes, as if Ms Phillipson was off to fight in the Spanish Civil War.
Ms Phillipson has been the chilly public face of the spiteful tax raid on independent schools, one of the nastiest policies Labour has yet publicly admitted to. And the scene made me wonder: 'Who are all these new Labour MPs, so cleverly propelled into Parliament by the self-indulgence of a few thousand Reform voters?' For that is what happened.
The actual Labour vote was pitifully small. There was never any true enthusiasm for them. But the Nigelistas' emotional spasm destroyed the line of defence which would otherwise have kept us from swapping Bad Tories for Worse Labour.
Well, who are the new MPs? Are they open-minded, undogmatic, generous men and women who see both sides of the argument? Or are they the kind of people you meet in local government, in comprehensive schools and the new universities, zealous Net Zero Greens, ferociously politically correct, filled with scorn for conservative ideas and people, always up for a heresy hunt?
I have a hunch they fall into the second category, and we'll see that pretty soon in the way they use their huge majority.
Still, the people who helped to put them in will be able to comfort themselves with The Farage Party's contingent of five MPs
I noticed on Friday that Sir Keir Starmer's arrival at Downing Street was greeted by a 'crowd' of people waving Union Jacks. Who were they? Normal members of the public have been barred from Downing Street for decades. Who gave them the flags? Labour supporters are iffy about the UK flag, which many of them regard as racist. Over the years to come, film of this event will be repeatedly shown, as will still pictures of it, as if it was a real spontaneous demonstration of welcome. It was not, any more than the similar 'welcome' given to Sir Anthony Blair in 1997.
Why I still have doubts over Letby verdict
Last September I expressed grave doubts about the justice of the conviction of Lucy Letby, the nurse accused of murdering seven newborn babies in a Chester hospital neonatal unit. I pointed out that there were possible weaknesses in the case against her which are especially serious because she has been sent to prison until she dies.
Nurse Lucy Letby has been sent to prison until she dies
Soon afterwards, I had to remain silent about this for months. This was to avoid prejudicing the retrial of one of the cases against her where the jury could not reach a verdict. I am still not quite sure of the purpose of this retrial, as Ms Letby cannot be given a sentence any longer or harder than the one she is now serving, but there you are.
That trial is now over, ending in another conviction. So I can return to the subject.
I remain very disturbed by the case. This is why I hope that everyone in this country will soon be able to read a careful, calm and thoughtful examination of the case by Rachel Aviv, in the New Yorker magazine of May 20. The New Yorker is very careful about what it publishes and did not lightly print this article. But it was not available in this country at the time, again because of the retrial. I think it may soon be readily obtainable here. It should form the basis of a badly needed debate.
We need a real anti-PC drama
The ITV drama Douglas Is Cancelled has for some reason been praised as a courageous depiction of the intolerance of the modern media world. I disagree.
In the programme, starring Hugh Bonneville and Karen Gillan, a middle-aged male TV presenter's life and career are supposedly ruined because of an incorrect joke he has told at a wedding. But in fact this is not what happens at all. Someone seems to have been frightened of condemning this sort of mob justice. Instead viewers endure a series of peculiar, misleading and quite dull sub-plots.
In Douglas Is Cancelled, starring Hugh Bonneville and Karen Gillan, a middle-aged male TV presenter's life and career are supposedly ruined because of an incorrect joke he has told at a wedding
There's an apparent #MeToo episode, in which we are toyed with at tedious length. There's an attack on popular newspapers. There's an absurd gag-writer who could not possibly be so inept. And there are cheap, shallow caricatures of so-called 'snowflakes' to make it look as if the drama is a bit Right-wing.
Well, it isn't, as is evident from the guest appearance of Left-wing saint Kirsty Wark. I don't think she'd have been so keen on a truly anti-PC programme. Ms Wark plays herself as an interviewer at the ghastly liberal Hay Festival (full disclosure: I was once abruptly and rudely disinvited from Hay, no reason given, but I can guess it was for writing a book critical of illegal drugs and their users).
A real drama about modern intolerance is still badly needed, though I'm not sure who'd show it.
Bill Maher predicts the EXACT date Biden will step down for historic reason... before making hilarious comparison
