Um that isn't at all what I wrote, Dawn. You have quoted six words I did use and then put them into a completely different sentence!

I'd approve of this strongly.

Excellent comments.

Ken Clarke is very often wrong as well.

I heard Colin speak on Friday evening and was very impressed. The very best of luck to him and to CCF!

Elaine, you say I have used rose-tinted specs but I actually agree with you on both counts. Tebbit is indeed less relenting towards the IRA in my chapter than Thatcher's successors. And yes, because of Nigel Lawson's policy of shadowing the Mark inflation went above 8% by mid 1989. But the 1990s recession wasn't so bad because high inflation persisted until late 1992. It was so bad because we persisted in pegging sterling to the Mark until late 1992. As I wrote above: "A policy of freely floating exchange rates would not necessarily have prevented the recession of the early 1990s. After all, Nigel Lawson’s policy of shadowing the Deutschmark had led to high inflation, which the government rightly fought with higher interest rates. But the insanity of the ERM policy was the way it forced Britain to retain those higher interest rates long after both inflation and economic growth rates had tanked. A much more brutal recession than necessary ensued."

The Blair government used the army to run fire engines during the 2002 fireman's strike. Was it totalitarian? Much as I opposed Blair, I think not. It's one thing to say workers have the right to withdraw their labour. It's quite another to say - as you appear to be saying - that it shouldn't be permissible to bring in temporary replacements, especially when they are bringing the London economy to a halt.

Thanks, very helpful - two thoughts: As I say above, Bercow is simply misunderstanding his role if he thinks it is to impose the preferences of the majority of voters on MPs. Second, what a stupidly leading thing to ask: "Would you like to see Prime Ministers' Questions become less noisy and more calm and reasoned?". This entirely begs the question and simply asserts that noisy debate is the antonym to reasoned debate. Given this, it's more surprising that 21% said they didn't want more reasoned discussion than that 57% said they did!

The notion that Nixon is synonymous with Watergate that is itself an editorial slant. I don't complain about this - it's a great film - but I don't share this view. Allan, you're almost confessing that you think what is objectively true about the man matters less than popular perceptions and misconceptions. Is it wrong to use a blog post to disagree with that notion? How many seats have I lost the Tories at the next election by doing so?