Predictably bonkers

Oh no, not again! First Dilnot. Now Leveson. Faced with a crisis, whether the cost of social care or the collapse of trust in journalism, David Cameron sets up a commission or an enquiry, under distinguished and extremely intelligent experts, who spend many months of intensive work of evidence-gathering and deliberation. They then come up with long reports with workable conclusions.

Then in Parliament the Prime Minister makes polite noises about the reports as he presents his verdict. But when it comes down to the nub of the matter he weaves and ducks. What a shame! In the case of Dilnot, the Government has been dithering about the limit of contribution towards social care that people should be expected to make. The suspicion of course is that HMG wants to set it higher than Dilnot's recommendation, to reduce its own perfectly affordable input. The effect of that would of course be to penalise those with modest savings, as they'd lose a larger proportion than those with fat-cat pensions.

And now with Leveson the plan is to present a bill to Parliament which, as the Culture Minister, Maria Miller, admitted to John Humphris on the Today programme, is designed to prove Lord Leveson's proposal unworkable. Unsurprisingly virtually all today's newspapers have been rubbishing the report. When you come to think of it, that's a pretty strong recommendation for it. They don't want to see their licence to kill reputations, privacy and even worse curtailed - and that is what they fear a more independent effective regulatory body might do. In Parliament time and again we heard the old canard that Lord Leveson was proposing state regulation of the press, the myth which that same press is very busy promulgating. It is clear that he is not. He is proposing that someone guards those who are keeping an eye on the guardians of our freedom.

Lady Helena Kennedy QC, the great champion of free speech, compared the Prime Minister's rejection of Leveson's central recommendation to a genuine Whitehall memo that followed the last enquiry into press standards by Sir David Calcutt 20 years ago. "We know we're not going to do anything. We can't say we're not going to do anything, so we have to say something that covers up the fact that we're not going to do anything." As she said, it could have been a line out of Yes, Minister. The tragic thing is that "not anything" means nothing for people like the Dowlers and the McCanns. David Cameron assured such victims that he would ensure the implementation of Lord Leveson's proposals "unless they were completely bonkers". Apparently he reckons they are. Most of us know they're not, and wonder whether our politicians have learned anything from the past few years.

Why the picture at the top of this piece? Well, you know what they say about kicking things into the long grass... One way we can try to prevent this happening to the Leveson report is signing the petition launched today by Gerry McCann and Chris Jefferies, the traduced teacher from Bristol:   http://hackinginquiry.org/petition/.

Channel 4 news

I've had a number of complimentary comments about Wednesday's 4Thought programme, as well as the licensed insults that are the stuff of internet feedback. (I notice for example on YouTube it's more disliked than liked! YouTube 4Thought clip) I must say I thought that the editors had done a  good job with my forty minutes of interview. I was particularly pleased that they'd focused on the positive elements of what I'd said. Today I had an email from a university friend:

"I guess they left out many good things that you also said. But what they left in left me quieted with that quiet that comes from knowing that one has heard truth. And that truth and love are one.

"A friend of ours died aged 50, of lymphoma. He was a pastor and, with his wife, at the heart of any party, connected to people near and far. As we accompanied him in his last weeks, besides the sadness there was something infinitely precious for us all. Before he died he said, I don't 'spect you'll want to put a gravestone up, but if you do, write on it, 'he never knew he was so loved'....

"Jane looked wonderful - beautiful, poised and with an air of 'don't anyone mess with me' that was just right." (Obviously, I agreed with that!)

Yesterday we saw retired GP Michael Irwin who accompanied a patient to end his life in Zurich and hoped to be prosecuted for it. He's a committed campaigner for euthanasia, and intoned the all too easy mantra of "compassion". As I've pointed out on a number of occasions, compassion means suffering with, not killing out of sympathy. We have a couple more doctors to look forward to, one on each side of the debate, and then a disabled man talking about palliative care. Interestingly at least three contributors, I think, are 'Dignity in Dying' (formerly Voluntary Euthanasia Society) supporters.

Meanwhile the news has continued. Alan Johnson MP resigning as Shadow Chancellor for personal family reasons - I'm glad he's apparently put his family in front of his career. (Coincidentally at the moment we're watching dvds of The Pallisers, based on Trollope's novels, in which Plantaganet Palliser sacrificed his career, as Chancellor, in order to save his marriage to Lady Glencora.) Andrew Coulson, former editor of The News of the World, resigning as David Cameron's communications director, because, as Mr Coulson said, coverage of the News of the World's phone hacking had "made it difficult for me to give the 110% needed in this role" - odd, that phrase, for a communicator. 110% (attention) is an impossibility, isn't it? Both resignations, we are told, call in to question the judgement of Ed Milliband  and David Cameron respectively. Oh no! They're not fallible, are they? As Tony Blair has proved before the Chilcott Enquiry. 

Thoughts for the day

Lesley, my physio, came yesterday morning and was quite pleased with how I'm doing. She reckons my speech is no worse and my walking all right. Mark you, I WAS trying to impress her! There's been a delay in trying muscle relaxing drugs, to stop my knees knocking, as there's a warning in the instructions if you have epilepsy. So we're consulting them that know. Anyway she says it's not urgent. Before she left, she asked if we'd thought about what we'd do if either of us, particularly Jane, went down with swine 'flu. I'm ashamed to say that it hadn't occurred to me as a problem. I suppose I think of Jane as indestructible. But it was a good point. I gather I'd be a priority for vaccine when it comes on stream, and one would hope that Jane would be too as I'd be up a gum-tree without her. I'm amazed at how soon a vaccine has been developed, probably being authorised for September. But the point, of course, is that in a pandemic social services would be so stretched that normal emergency cover would be virtually non-existent. We were sent via a friend something from the county council about ''flu friends', which recommends having a number of people you can contact if you're diagnosed (by phone) as having it. They recommend having a number. What a good idea, I thought! And then I thought, That's what the Church is for, isn't it?

I read in 'The Telegraph' today (not my usual paper, I hasten to add) that the BBC in the person of Mr Mark Damazer, controller of Radio 4 - I wonder if that title is meant to be reassuring, shades of Thomas the Tank engine's Fat Controller - is considering axing or altering or 'opening up' Thought for the Day on the Today Programme. Apparently it's too 'religious', and out of place in a flagship current affairs programme. Actually although I'm not a great fan, it would seem to me to diminish the programme to take away the three minutes of reflection from the headlong rush of news and comment. As the Supertramp poet said, 'What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare...?' Mr Terry Sanderson, militant president of the National Secular Society, is quoted as saying, 'The majority of people are not even religious and they want to hear a point of view that reflects their own.' Hello! Have you read the 2001 Census recently? '14.6 per cent in England and 18.5 per cent in Wales (state they have no religion).' That's a new definition of majority.

I don't want to sound censorious, but last week it was the press's turn, wasn't it? Bit like the pot calling the kettle black, it felt. Having spent weeks telling us how corrupt MPs are, we now discovered that phone-tapping is the stock in trade of the News of the World and, it is alleged, of the press in general. Maybe not directly, but via private eyes.

PS Guess what colour the singers on Songs of Praise were wearing this Sunday!