Main menu:
This page last updated 01 February 2008. Site Map
Before starting on this site, I let off steam occasionally by writing to the Independent's letters page. It's partly pure vanity (for me at least); there is a kick which threatens to be quite addictive in seeing one's name in print (which probably explains putting this site up for public examination, too). But it is also an antidote to the feeling of never being heard, of living in something less than a democracy. And of course, just once in a while, I hope I have something useful to say, as well. [I regret the absence of my first (and for a long time, only) letter, which was printed, on the suspect nature of BCCI, c1987?]
A couple of these letters are meaningless out of context; I include them for completeness... or, more likely, for my own satisfaction.
The date given is of writing, not of publication.
There are probably half a dozen more such letters for which I can't (yet) find a copy - at least one was printed (on mental health and the question of choosing an embryo without problematic genes, c2003).
17th. December, 2007 (Printed) - English Spelling
What if a new spelling system for the English language were to be introduced and accepted by the majority of the English speaking world? ("Children's life chances blighted", 17 December). There would be now be a body of scientific, cultural and political literature (physically embodied in billions of books) which would presumably, by Masha Bell's token, remain inaccessible to precisely those who struggle now - and would become even more inaccessible to a new generation trained in a new orthography.
Perhaps that is what going to happen anyway: the written language is shewing - showing - its ability to evolve on an almost daily basis, not least on the net and by texting: with the speed of change, it looks as if we shall inevitably arrive at having a formal and one or many demotic written languages. It is unlikely that an imposed new orthodoxy will change this.
As for the question of accessibility: a suggestion that learning to read and write English is uniquely difficult simply isn’t true – Japanese provides the most obvious proof of that. And English is a very forgiving language; I can’t speak for Korean, but a simple mistake (by, say, a foreigner) in Finnish can render an incomprehensibility which seems extraordinary to those used to the flexible nature of English.
It's all by the way, in any case. There are too many variants of spoken English for one spelling system to be much 'easier' for a majority than the present one; and, thank Heaven, there is no Academy with the authority to impose a new system.
21st. November, 2007 (Printed) - Loss of CDs
While I hope that information about me, my friends and relatives has not been disseminated, I nevertheless in part welcome the recent loss of so much data. With any luck at all it will vaccinate us against allowing our state to continue its Orwellian momentum.
Imagine that this same event had happened in five years' time. The loss of data now is minimal by comparison.
In passing: I have had confidential information about me escape at least twice in the past. Each time I have been told that it couldn't happen again - more modern systems were now in place. Please, folks, do not fall for that particular line
14th. October, 2007 - On the Nature of His Noodliness
In a spirit of Noodlian ecumenism, may I suggest the One Article, to which I believe that all those in schism can subscribe?
If Spaghetti had not already existed, it would have been necessary for Mankind to invent it.
30th. September, 2007 (Approx) (Printed) - A Possible General Election.
Over the last few days, pundits have been analysing the factors that the Prime Minister might take into account when deciding whether or not to go for an early general election. Predictably they focus on his party's electability - poll findings, the opinions of MPs in marginal constituencies, public perceptions of Brown's financial record and so on.
It is a pity that the question of when it would be in the public interest to hold an election seems to figure so far down the list.
1st. August, 2007 (Printed) - On the Nature of Space Music.
Pace David McNickle (Musical Star, letters, 28th July); If Holst's 'The Planets' is not World Music, many times over, I don't know what is.
19th. March, 2007 (Printed) - NOTA
If election expenses of political parties are to paid by the state on the basis of votes at a previous election, then this taxpayer really does begin to demand a NOTA (none of the above) option on the ballot paper.
10th. March, 2007 - Reform of the House of Lords.
Members of the House of Commons are often political animals who conform to certain patterns of thought and action. Elected, they have opted for an elected upper house - which in turn will be filled with political animals, many with similar personalities.
In the past, the House of Lords was filled by persons with claims of breeding, the first of each family having been appointed by a monarch with claims of breeding.
'Like chooses like' once again, although admittedly election is to be preferred to accident of birth by those of us who will have no access by either route.
But there are so many options that have not been discussed. May I, through your column, beg the chance to put one different view.
I would welcome a varied house, from all walks, with the widest range of experience: a true senate.
So, even at this late stage, I suggest a House that includes of each of these:
Elective democracy: (Say) 100 members elected through the ballot box.
Political experience: 50 or 100 experienced politicians lately in the commons - possibly appointed, or perhaps preferably elected by vote in the commons. I should like to see the PM free to appoint but to a very limited extent: why not a limit of say 7, or 10, or 20 members.
Democracy in a very different - and currently forgotten - form: 100 randomly selected (volunteers?) from the public.
Life experience: 50 or 100 members persons of high esteem each elected by his or her profession or union, or perhaps by a sector, financial, health, educational, agricultural, etc. A wide and perhaps argumentative range of possibilities here.
Additionally, perhaps more arguably: Members with more independently acknowledged achievements, such as, say, Nobel Prize winners, created automatically (ex officio?).
Tentatively: Perhaps rather smaller numbers of each of the following, legacy of the past perhaps but a part of a senate in the purest sense: so say 50 hereditary members plus Law Lords; and Lords Spiritual updated and inclusive of other faiths.
And finally: Would there be a problem with allowing the House to co-opt a very limited number of members? These might have much to offer - perhaps in a time of national need - but might not be chosen by any of the other routes.
These figures giving a House of the order of 500 members,
It all depends on what we want: we must of course have a political element, but surely we should have a much richer and more flexible texture to the upper house than I believe is currently being envisaged.
And I pray for a new place for the new House; preferably not adversarially face to face.
22nd. December, 2005 - 'Narrative'
Mr Blair has asked for a "narrative" on the events surrounding 7th July, rather than a public enquiry.
Is the Prime Minister aware that this word, through its post-modern attendance on this administration, has acquired connotations of fact management and manipulation, and consequently of duplicity if not of corruption?
28th. March, 2005 - NOTA
May I plead through your column for a re-opening of the debate on introducing the NOTA (None Of The Above) option on our ballot papers?
It might reduce the need for tactical voting, discussed by correspondents here recently: in too many constituencies the current system leads to negative campaigning (against one candidate rather than for another), to voters endorsing candidates whom they do not in fact support, and in fact to a pressure on voters to think tactically (at which they may or may not be skilled/informed) rather than democratically as should be their right.
NOTA would allow voters so wishing to register disapproval of all candidates with a deliberate, clearly defined vote, rather than by abstention. In fact a large NOTA vote, should it occur, would send a loud message which could not easily be ignored. Whether or not a NOTA majority should lead to a new election I leave to others to consider.
Parties would be much more obliged to consider closely the wishes of constituencies when choosing their candidates (rather than perhaps sometimes imposing them?) - each of whom would have to offer a better option to the voter than would the NOTA vote.
I cannot see that turnout would be reduced by the NOTA option: if there is even a chance that it would improve, surely in the current climate the option should be considered.
There may well be benefits of NOTA that I haven't thought of, while on the other hand it won't solve every problem; but it would have one great advantage: it would be fairly cheap and straightforward to introduce.
September, 2004 (?) (Printed) - Civil Liberties.
Mr Blair has reaffirmed his determination to bring liberty and democracy to Iraq, and he believes that history will judge him kindly.
In this country, liberty and democracy do not rest on the good intentions of the state, nor on values of sincerity or even Christianity, but on a range of fundamental liberties that have been fought for over centuries: habeas corpus, the right to silence, the right to jury trial, freedom from double jeopardy; and now, the secrecy of the ballot, the separation of powers, the inadmissibility of evidence from torture; et al. However, these are all being trimmed or threatened.
Do we really need Kofi Annan to tell us that civil liberties are being restricted unnecessarily in the fight against terrorism? Do we imagine that it is only happening elsewhere? With the threat of terrorism, of course our liberties can only survive at a (possibly tremendous) cost - but our forebears paid too, and not just so we would give everything up within a single generation. What we lose now, we will find very hard to recover.
We need to remind ourselves that the old liberties are there not to give undue protection to terrorists or criminals, but to protect all of us against arrogant and overbearing government. We are wasting our time in Iraq if we can't hold on to our values here.
17c.