I have a new hero. His name is Mark Pritchard, M.P.

I have a new hero.

His name is Mark Pritchard.

He is the Conservative MP for The Wrekin.

Mr Pritchard moved this afternoon in the House of Commons a resolution in favour of a ban on wild animals in circuses.

Against all expectations and despite the anticipated opposition of the government whips - opposition which did not materialize - Mr Pritchard's resolution was passed.

Well done, that man!

Here is a link - with a video of Mr Pritchard speaking about his being bribed and bullied - to the BBC's on-line coverage of the story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13884165

Here are illustrations of what Mr Pritchard sought to ban.

And here (copied from the Financial Times website), most astonishingly of all, are Mr Pritchard's words as he opened the debate in the House:

"It has been in interesting last few days.

If I offered to amend my motion or drop my motion or not call a vote on this motion… I was offered reward, an incentive.

It was a pretty trivial job, as most of the ones I have had – until at least probably 30 minutes from now – are.

But I was offered incentive and reward on Monday, then it was ratcheted up to last night when I was threatened.

I had a call from the prime minister’s office directly, and I was told unless I withdraw this motion, that the prime minister himself said that he would look upon it very dimly indeed.

Well I have a message for the whips and for the prime minister of our country, and I didn’t pick a fight with the prime minister of our country, but I have a message: I may just be a little council house lad from a very poor background, but that background gives me a backbone, it gives me a thick skin and I am not going to be kowtowed by the whips on an issue that I feel passionately about."

Some questions are already being asked. I look forward to hearing or reading the answers.

I say again, 'Well done, that man!'

A story without a picture - direct from Afghanistan

The following has appeared on a blog on the Daily Telegraph website today. It purports to be from someone - possibly a Scot - working in Afghanistan. If it is genuine, it is a devastating demolition of the continuing and ongoing NATO intervention in Afghanistan. I re-publish it here on my blog without a picture. The words need no picture. They speak for themselves.

benny_from_the_bronx writes:

"I work out of small US FOBs in rural Kandahar...I am in one now and I can quite simply state that the place is a mess. The US are throwing money at locals (Cash For Work programmes) to prevent them being payed by the Taliban because the US pay more...an Afghan will work for whoever is paying the most. Once this CFW programme ends and the money stops...those same afghans will simply go to the Taliban and volunteer their services for money.

Once NATO leaves...and the Karzai Government run the show (hahahahahaha) the Taliban (a ficticious name anyway) will simple disband and they will all return to their own villages and tribes and commence fighting each other...which is what they've been doing for centuries. This is Afghanistan...!!! It is different to any other country on earth...people in rural villages do not care about what Karzai proclaims or what the Government say...some of these villagers have never been to the village in the next valley nor do they care what goes on across the valley...they certainly don't care what goes on in Kabul.

Afghanistan is what it is...that's the way God made it...Insh'allah as they say...we will never change it, no matter how much money we spend or how good it makes us feel that we built a new school at the cost of $50 million and several dead soldiers... a school that will probably never be used because the Taliban will threaten and intimidate everyone from using it...and after a couple of harsh winters it will slowly collapse...because it wasn't uilt that well anyway...and why wasn't it built well...? Because, in the spirit of fair trade...the contract for the new school has been sub-contracted out...then the sub-contractor has sub-sub-contracted it out to a local afghan construction firm...who throw together a couple of bricks and cement...and the result is a $50 million school project, where only about $10,000 has been spent on the actual school. The rest has gone on bribes and people taking their "cut".

This is the way NATO is fighting it's war...this is the new Counter Insurgency strategy...call me an old fashioned fool...but the whole point of counter-insurgency...is to "Counter" the "Insurgency"...once that has been achieved (which it has not)...then...and only then, should we be thinking about reconstruction and development...if at all...is it REALLY our responsibility? Or are we just feeling guilty? We scream about issues like Child Mortality rates and the Opression of Women and we send well meaning but oh so naive NGO's into the country to try and "fix" this because "we"...us in the West...proclaim that "we" know what's best for them...for these poor illiterate peasants of rural Afghanistan...how condescending can we be...??? Afghan villagers have dealt with low child mortality rates/abuse of their women and other such "nasty" things since the dawn of time...it is their way...it is their tribal culture...we are not going to "educate" some 85 year old village elder into being more understanding and moderate...are we really THAT stupid and naive...? Erm...well...it seems we are...yes...!!!

It is a waste of time...nothing will change here...this is Afghanistan...this is a place where technology is not required nor desired...this is a country where a cow or a goat determines a mans wealth...not his car, house, watch, phone or salary...Afghans want little and have less. This has always been the way...for centuries...we will not change this...this is Afghanistan."

I've been reading again - here's my review for Amazon

Having been inadequately educated and having been brought up amidst Toryism and surrounded by what passes for Tory 'thought,' I have long known that what was missing in my reading at least was more study of the radicals in our British history. I have tried to remedy the omission. I came to admire David Lloyd George for his sticking up for the down-trodden in Wales and elsewhere and for his opposing the war with the Boers and, likewise, James Ramsay Macdonald for his principled but unsuccessful stand against British involvement in war in 1914. Another book has now come along that has helped me again.

'A Radical History of Britain.' by Edward Vallance, is a massive (639 pages, including notes and the index) and important study of British history as seen via radical eyes. It starts (after an 'introduction' that brings in King Alfred) with the Magna Carta. It moves on to the turbulent fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and I can now better distinguish my Jack Cade from my Robert Kett, my John Ball from my Jack Straw, and my Wat Tyler from my Lollards.

The English Revolution - one of my favourite periods of history - is well covered and such as the Levellers, the Diggers and the Muggletonians become people and causes rather than the footnotes to which they are often consigned. No radical history would be worthwhile without chapters on Thomas Paine, the Rights of Man and a description of the torn British attitudes towards the French Revolution. The Peterloo Massacre is given pride of place, as are the Tolpuddle Martyrs and the Chartists. I knew about these but I now know much more.

Later in the nineteenth century, the emergence of the women's suffragists brought to prominence the rights of women as much as the 'rights of man.' The latter didn't always embrace the former. One of my reservations about the book was that too much space is given to the suffragists' cause at the expense of other aspects of radicalism.

Another reservation was that some great radicals are not mentioned at all. For example, Mr Joseph Arch, M.P. (1826 - 1919), founder of the first union of agricultural labourers and an outstanding advocate of better pay and votes for many of the labourers - not won until 1884 - as well as a strong supporter of freedom of religion in the country areas where the Church of England was dominant and the introduction of Parish Councils. I recall in my own lifetime the mutual antagonism of the respective adherents of 'church' and 'chapel.' Sadly, both church and chapel are finding these secular times hard. Parish Councils thrive, however. Maybe that is what some of those early British radicals desired.

All in all, though I had reservations about this book, I recommend it highly. It's a very good read and I continue to learn.

Here's the link to the book, the review - and others:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Radical-History-Britain-Visionaries-Revolutionaries/dp/1408700506/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1308651794&sr=8-2

A priceless cartoon from Peter Brookes of The Times

"Britain cannot keep up its role in Libya air war due to cuts" - Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, of the Royal Navy

The following is a piece from today's Daily Telegraph:

"Navy chief: Britain cannot keep up its role in Libya air war due to cuts

The British military intervention in Libya is unsustainable, the head of the Navy has said.
  
Adml Sir Mark Stanhope said the campaign would have been more effective without the Government's defence cuts.
 
The aircraft carrier and the Harrier jump-jets scrapped under last year's strategic defence review would have made the mission more effective, faster and cheaper, he said.

Sir Mark warned that the Navy would not be able to sustain its operations in Libya for another three months without making cuts elsewhere.

The First Sea Lord's comments will stir the debate over defence cuts that have left Britain without a working aircraft carrier and forced the Royal Navy's Harrier jump jets to be mothballed.

Ministers have repeatedly argued that Britain has had no need of either HMS Ark Royal or the Harriers in the Libyan mission because planes can fly from bases in Italy, such as Gioia del Colle.

But Sir Mark said the carrier and its planes would have been useful in Libya. "If we had Ark Royal and the Harriers, I feel relatively reassured that we would have deployed that capability off Libya," he said.

Harriers would have been used for "ground support" operations, attacking Col Gaddafi's land forces, he said.

Sir Mark appeared to contradict ministers' assurances on the Italian bases. He said operating Harriers from an aircraft carrier would have allowed British forces to respond more quickly to events on the ground in Libya.

"The pros would have been a much more reactive force," he said. "Rather than deploying from Gioia del Colle, we would deploy within 20 minutes as opposed to an hour and a half, so obviously there are some advantages. It's cheaper to fly an aircraft from an aircraft carrier than from the shore."

Scrapping Ark Royal and its Harriers was perhaps the most controversial decision made in last year's Strategic Defence and Security Review. The Coalition has said it could not afford to maintain the ship or the planes. Military analysts and retired defence chiefs have said the cuts have limited Britain's military capabilities.

Despite his remarks, Sir Mark said there could be no going back on the cuts. "We have got to look forward."

British forces have been in action in Libya since March, yet Col Gaddafi remains in power. On June 1, Nato extended the military mission by another 90 days.

Sir Mark said British forces would be "comfortable" with another three months of operations.

"Beyond that, we might have to request the Government to make some challenging decisions about priorities," he said. "There are different ways of doing this. It's not simply about giving up standing commitments, we will have to rebalance."

Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, said last week that Britain and France were struggling to maintain the Libyan operation without significant American support and supplies.

Sir Mark confirmed that the Navy had been forced to ask the US to resupply Tomahawk cruise missiles used by submarines targeting Libya.

"We are not running out, but we certainly have to take action to replace those weapons to bring stockpiles back up to where they were," he said.

As well as Ark Royal and the Harriers, the Navy is losing 5,000 posts under the defence review.

Rear-Adml David Steel, the head of Navy personnel, said the defence cuts would be a major challenge for the Senior Service.

"Our ships are hugely capable but we just don't have enough of them," he told a veterans' conference in Plymouth at the weekend.

"Having to make so many people redundant would be almost comical if it were not so serious."

Dr Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, defended the defence review last night. He said: "We continue to have the resources necessary to carry out the operations we are undertaking."

An MoD source said: "Unfortunately Harriers wouldn't have been able to carry the precision weapons needed for these operations."

Highlighting military anger over the shrinking Armed Forces, another admiral warned that "comical" defence cuts would leave the Navy without enough ships to be effective."

I have contributed an on-line comment, as follows:

"Then why on earth did our leaders blunder into yet another war that we cannot afford? They must be off their heads."

'Was my son's death in Afghanistan a price worth paying?,' by Stuart Alexander, of 'The Independent'

We have received news that two Royal Marines have been killed in Afghanistan. This brings the total of British deaths in or as a result of that 'mission' to 368.

The Independent today carries a piece by Stuart Alexander, the father of Marine Samuel Giles William Alexander, M.C., and I can do no better on my blog than to reproduce the piece, along with photographs of Marine Alexander (above) and again, with his colleague, Lieutenant Oliver Richard Augustin (below).

Stuart Alexander writes:

"Was my son's death in Afghanistan a price worth paying?

The call, when it comes, is so stunning that everything goes numb and you shake. But the call, at 6.15pm going into a bank holiday weekend, is not a shock. It is the devastating realisation of all the worries and fears that gnaw at everyone, day and night, who has family, friends and colleagues in a theatre of war.

The other gnawing internal conflict for those same people, who support their loved ones 100 per cent in the job they are being asked to do, is that they may not be quite so enthusiastic about the policy which sends them there.

My son Sam, at 28, married to Claire with a son Leo, is dead. He was hoping to be given brief leave to be at Leo's first birthday, on 21 July, to see him take his first steps. An improvised explosive device has put paid to that, as it has for his lieutenant, Ollie Augustin. The last time Sam was written up in this newspaper he had taken a bullet through his helmet but escaped injury after leading a defensive firefight that allowed his shot and injured troop leader to be dragged to safety.

Among the comments added by readers online were some very mean-spirited, even sneering criticisms. The Queen awarded him a Military Cross at Windsor Castle. He came home, the baby was born, and then the pre-theatre training for his second tour kicked in.

At the same time, and especially recently, there have been two sustained public relations campaigns. One says that we (Nato/Britain) are succeeding militarily. The other says that we cannot win this thing militarily and that talking with the enemy must be stepped up. Plans for withdrawal are being worked on continuously.

Is that a kind of facing both ways at once, the accusation so recently lodged against Pakistan by a finger-wagging David Cameron? How motivating is it if a stream of analysts say this is an unwinnable war, pointing out that Afghanistan has witnessed more than 100 years of failed interventions?

 What is sure is that the deaths of these two Royal Marines from 42 Commando Group brought the total cost in lives for this campaign up to 368; one of those made me, for a while, the subject of that bland reference which is Ministry of Defence speak: "The family has been informed". Informed. What does the public really know? Are we winning the fight for democracy in Afghanistan, or is that country just a loose federation of fiefdoms, often still run by warlords?

Who or what are the Taliban? From what I have been told, this was not a ragbag peasant army. The most likely opponent, often very highly trained, could be Iranian, Chechen or Pakistani, not Afghans. So what does that do for the argument that, by waging war in Afghanistan, we are protecting Britain from a 9/11 or a Mumbai terrorist attack? Where does 7/7 fit into that? How much is the enemy already within?

Nothing should be taken away from Sam or the other 367, or the thousands more with life-changing injuries. But one thing for sure is that these guys and women are fighting primarily for each other in the most professional way. And there is much more emphasis on the ground, though not always in war reports, on forging links with the local community.

But Nato, when the Afghan public opinion chips are down, is not wanted. What we see as liberation is too often seen by them as occupation – and, if they listen to their own history, it is only a matter of time before Afghan life is restored. The average farmer struggles to survive and is certainly not a beneficiary of the reported $1bn of aid funding that has quietly disappeared.

Sam's life has not been wasted, because he was so damned good at what he did. The testimony from that most valuable of analysts, his own peer group, was alpha plus for him, humbling for me. My respect for him far outweighed any pride.

But, God knows, I loved you Sam and always will. And, if a faraway nondescript patch of rock and dust has claimed your flesh and blood, it can never claim your spirit, never destroy the bonds we had.

It is time the politicians were as professional as the men, including you, and the women they send to their deaths."

I have added an on-line comment to The Independent's website, as follows:
 
"Thank you for writing one of the most moving pieces that I have ever read in a paper. You and your family have the sincerest sympathy of my wife and myself. In June, 2008, I wrote to my MP (Mr James Paice) when the total of British deaths had reached 100. I said then that it was time to draw a line under a disaster. We now know that, since June, 2008, 268 more British lives have been lost. Innumerable others have been injured and the cash cost has also been enormous. In my opinion and despite the bravery exhibited by our superb British service people, it is definitely time to draw a line under this disaster. Let us bring them all home now, not in 2014."

Stuart Alexander's piece is to be found at -

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/was-my-sons-death-in-afghanistan-a-price-worth-paying-2290769.html

In drought-stricken East Anglia we have a Fen 'oasis'

Here (above) is a picture taken this morning. In drought-stricken East Anglia, it portrays Fen taters in a Fen oasis, where the crisis is less obvious.

I fear that few understand the seriousness of the drought situation in the rest of Eastern England. It is a crisis.

However, here in the Fens, whilst some crops desperately need a good soak, the best and most valuable food-producing farm land in England is still flourishing and, in particular, the roots and vegetables appear very promising.

Our country has a population of some sixty one millions - those are the ones who have allowed themselves to be counted - and the population of the world is well on its way to nine billions.

We cannot feed ourselves.

The world's population cannot feed itself.

Who but a lunatic would advocate that our best and most valuable food-producing farm land should go to waste in a welter of water and weeds?

Well, that is what the National Trust has been trying to achieve for the last eleven years through its so-called 'Wicken Vision.' In that time, I and many others have done battle with successive officers of the Trust.

First, it was Mr C. who was in charge. He has gorn.

Then it was Mr W. He has departed.

Then it was Mr M. He has 'retired.'

And then it was Mr B. I understand that he has 'moved on.'

None of the above are missed. They did more harm than good. The image of the National Trust has suffered by, through and from their efforts.

But we, the people of the Fens, are still here. And we are still fighting.

Finally, to show my readers and viewers a more 'scenic' view of the Fens, here (below) is a second picture taken this morning. Its charm, though I say that myself with insufficient modesty, still includes yet another valuable and flourishing crop - beetroot or red beet - and it is a credit to its growers. I hope that their efforts are appreciated both in the marketplace and in the kitchens of England.

Peter Brookes and the Queen and 'atonement' - enjoy!

Peter Brookes of The Times is at his most brilliant again today.

His subject is the Queen's state visit to the Republic of Ireland and the 'atonement' that the visit implies.

'As Swaffham Prior goes, so goes the nation,' I said

Some people laugh at Parish Councils. I don't. I have always believed that such really local authorities are the best and the most effective and efficient of all, and I write from less pleasing experience of both the District Council and the County Council.

I have been trying to get a good picture of Swaffham Prior Parish Council (of which I am a member) for some time, for my own records and for my blog and in order to submit it for publication to the Swaffham Crier, our village magazine, and, last evening, at the May monthly meeting and with the help of one of the Swaffham Crier reporters, Mr Mark Lewinski, we had success.

The picture above shows the full membership and the clerk and, from left to right, there are Mr Steve Kent-Phillips, Mrs Sandra Gynn, Mr Eric Day, myself, Mr John Covill (chairman), Mrs Karen King (clerk), Mr Andrew Camps, Mr Paul Latchford, Mr Peter Hart (vice-chairman), and Mr David Almond.

The meeting was one of the best ever and it was made all the more lively and interesting because we were discussing what we thought were to be the consequences of the Localism Bill, currently making its way through Parliament. As we had seen it, the Bill was intended to bring into being a new approach to planning - 'bottom up' as opposed to 'top down' - and the abolition of government-imposed targets for house-building and such as gypsy sites. We had successfully seen off a threat of one of the latter with the help of our District Councillor, Mr Allen Alderson, and we have been and are in a mood to be constructive with regard to the former. Indeed, we had received a submission from three prominent and helpful local people who wished to provide up to eight affordable homes, probably for rent, and up to sixteen 'market value' houses, all on the site that we, as a Council, had previously put at the top of our preferred list for possible development. There is no doubting the need for affordable housing in Swaffham Prior and the quid pro quo of 'market value' houses is generally accepted. We have the preferred site, we have the facilities (a good school, etc.), we have the opportunity and we have the key people 'on-side.' (Sadly, we no longer have a post office and shop and that lack was mentioned: maybe some more housing might merit the reinstatement of a post office and shop).

A lady planning officer, Abigail Taylor, from East Cambridgeshire District Council, was present in order to help us and to guide us forward. We all wished to go forward but, regrettably, there appear to be many more processes for our proposals to go through and, helpful though Ms. Taylor was, several of us saw fear that we were, again, to be bogged down in bureaucracy and tied up with red tape.

I thought - and said - that 'the forces of negativism' could represent an impediment to progress. I also said - and nobody disagreed - that the whole concept of 'localism' was at stake, that the 'bottom up' approach to planning was being tested and that Swaffham Prior, one of the first villages to take part in the process, would be seen as a test case for the success or otherwise of the Localism Bill. In short, the excellent intentions of the Bill seem now to be at risk. It might be an exaggeration to say that the Bill's success or otherwise depends on what happens in our village, but I want to witness locally some success for the Bill's national approach.

'As Swaffham Prior goes, so goes the nation,' I said. We shall see.

National Trust introduces 'Facebook' farming for £30!

OK, you don't believe me. Take a look at this in The Independent -

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/become-a-farmer-for-16330-no-experience-necessary-2278515.html

See: it must be true. It was in the newspapers!

Ten thousand 'farmers' at £30 apiece is a nice little earner for the National Trust.

It might generate interest in the reality of farming: it might not.

What worries me is the reality of the National Trust's 'farming' in another part of Cambridgeshire where this airy-fairy organisation is busily buying up the finest and most productive Fen farm land in order to turn it into an unkempt and waterlogged welter of brambles, elder bushes, ragwort, stinging nettles and thistles.

Millions of pounds have been spent on draining this land: it is now going to waste and our population is growing beyond sixty-one millions, all of whom must be fed.

We must be mad to permit it and to provide its financing.

Councillor Allen Alderson wins again in 'Swaffhams'

The District Council elections went well in our area. My friend, Councillor Allen Alderson, of Reach, won 'The Swaffhams' ward (the parishes of Swaffham Prior, Swaffham Bulbeck and Reach) again and I have just passed my congratulations to him through his wife, Rachael, who said that Allen was 'a bit tired and sitting in his chair' (at 8 a.m.) after an all-night count at Soham.

They hadn't got finished until about 6.30 a.m. on account of the AV referendum ballots having to be dealt with.

Allen's 'official' portrait is above left, but I much prefer the more informal picture of him taken with me at Bottisham Village College during last year's General Election campaign.

We had just shared a joke - I think. Here is the picture.

He's dead at last. Well done, America. Now, let's get our armies out of Afghanistan as soon as possible

Our allied armies have been in Afghanistan for years, but many of us believed that Osama bin Laden had done a bunk.

And so it is now proved.

U.S. special forces have done what our armies weren't able to.

They got the monster in Pakistan and he's dead at last.

Well done, America.

Now, let's get our armies out of Afghanistan as soon as possible.

We have lost too many brave men and women ‘over there’ - and too much money as well.

I look forward to Prince William becoming King and Catherine becoming Queen. We could do a lot worse.

As I have often made clear, I have republican sympathies, but I hope very much that Prince William and Catherine (Kate) Middleton, his wife-to-be, are very happy together.

Given that a British republic is unlikely in my lifetime, I look forward to him becoming King and her becoming Queen.

We could do a lot worse.

Four prize pieces from Peter Brookes - Happy Easter!

Let us, at the very least, remember our servicemen

News has come via the BBC (it came well down in the list of news items on BBC1 at 1 o'clock) that yet another of our brave British soldiers has died as a result of injuries received in Afghanistan.

The total of British dead in or as a result of Afghanistan is now 364.

Here is the link to the BBC website and the news -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-13139980

Whilst attention is on the latest developments in Libya and the up-coming Royal wedding, the celebrations and the street parties, our servicemen are still fighting and dying in the hell-hole of Afghanistan.

Let us, at the very least, remember them.

Better still, bring them all home - alive.

Post Script (added at 6.10 p.m.):

It appears that I was wrong in saying 'servicemen.' It has been announced that the latest British death was that of Captain Lisa Jade Head (pictured below) of 11 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Regiment.

I must be old-fashioned for, whilst any death of a service person is awful, that of a service woman seems to me to be doubly so.

We mourn her loss.

I know that the clock cannot be turned back but ...

I am suspicious of David Cameron.

Is he hiding his policy failures by latching on to supposedly 'populist' causes?

He was clearly electioneering with yesterday's 'immigration' speech, but I am sorry to say that I did not believe that he was telling the truth, for he said, in question time following the speech, ‘This [what he had said] is Liberal Democrat policy.’ I do not believe that.

And in any case it is nonsense for him to imply that the problems stemming from mass non-European immigration started in the last twelve years.

The West Indian style black gang gun and drugs ‘culture’ didn’t start in the last twelve years; the Asian male abuse of British women didn’t start in the last twelve years; the alien and isolationist Islamist breeding of ‘British-born’ enemies of the West didn’t start in the last twelve years.

Look at Leeds, Leicester, Luton and London: see the difference.

I believe that we have been hoodwinked and let down by politicians with their own destructive agenda for the last sixty five years.

We were never asked if we wanted our country to be more multi-racial and more multi-cultural.

When I was a lad living in rural Cambridgeshire between Cambridge and Newmarket, the only coloured people usually to be seen were a few Indian princes ‘up’ at Cambridge and the late ‘Prince’ Monolulu, the racing tipster, touting and shouting his ‘I gotta horse.’

I know that the clock cannot be turned back but, surely, we can slow the seemingly ceaseless loss of what we were once were - British.

The thing is, can Cameron and the ConDem government - or, indeed, any government - be trusted to do what I want?


I couldn't resist adding Peter Brookes's latest cartoon

Mr William Hague, our Foreign Secretary, has said that NATO should 'intensify' its efforts in Libya.

If, by 'intensify,' Mr Hague means British troops on the ground, then I say, 'No way, we've had enough of such as Afghanistan to want to get further involved in yet another Islamic state's problems.'

Besides, how do we know that getting rid of the Gaddafi family will lead to anything better?

I am convinced that al-Qaeda is just waiting in the wings.

Mr Paice must halt the loss of fine Fen farmland

I sent the following letter to the Cambridge News on the 16th of March. It has been published today, unfortunately in edited form*:

Dear Editor,

Like Dr. Peter Jackson (Letters, 15th March), I have communicated my views to Mr James Paice, M.P., the minister for agriculture, on the increasing amount and number of so-called 'wetlands' being created to the dis-benefit of arable farming and our own home food production.

Mr Paice has a lifetime's experience of farming and farming-related business, more than twenty years of representing Cambridgeshire constituencies and, I hope, sufficient sense to realise that taking our very best and most productive Fen farmland out of arable production is both daft and selfish.

It is daft because we have a population of nearly sixty-two millions (and those are the ones willing to be counted: how many will conveniently 'lose' the new census form?) and we haven't a hope in hell of feeding them without massive food imports which may not always be available. We should not give up food production when we ought to be increasing it.

And we are selfish because we expect all sorts of food - as well as those lovely filling station flowers - to be available all-year-round. Much comes from Africa, and by air. Many African countries cannot feed their own peoples. While Africans starve, we demand our mange tout. Do we have no shame?

The time will come - and soon - when we are in a worse position as regards feeding ourselves and our growing population, when we will not be able to afford such huge air-freighted food imports and when we realise that what may be 'sustainable' in this country is unsustainable overseas.

The ball is in Mr Paice's court. He must halt the loss of fine Fen farmland. We've had enough of 'wetlands' waste.

Yours sincerely,

Geoffrey Woollard.

Here is my picture of the National Trust's 'Wicken Vision' wetland waste.

















*The equally splendid Ely Standard published another version of my letter in full. Thanks, Debbie!

Where do some of these people do their shopping?

Whilst one is grateful for the small mercies in today's Budget, I wonder where some of these people in Parliament who were cheering on the Chancellor do their shopping. George Osborne has made minor changes to fuel duties for motorists. Some people are saying that they represent a 6p cut in fuel prices. I wish it were so. It's a 1p cut and a postponement of a 5p increase. My local filling station (at Soham) now has diesel fuel at 140.9p per litre, the highest I have ever known. If I drive to the nearest Tesco (at Newmarket), it might be a penny or two less, but it would cost me more to drive there.

Country dwellers like me can add up: we're screwed wherever we go.

(So we stay at home).

Post Script (added 25th March): So much for the ConDem government's fuel price 'cut.' Mr George Osborne should see what I have seen at my local filling station this morning - diesel fuel is now 142.9p per litre, again the highest I have even known. We have been conned - again.

He wasn't everybody's favourite Defence Secretary ...

Some of my friends will be surprised that I choose today to portray on my blog the Rt. Hon. Bob Ainsworth, M.P. He wasn't everybody's favourite Defence Secretary, but in yesterday's six-hour House of Commons debate on Libya, he was one of those who managed to distinguish themselves by speaking loudly and clearly about their doubts and their worries for the future.

Mr Ainsworth said: “It is relatively easy to support things on day one, but it is relatively difficult to support them on month three. There was a huge majority in favour of the Iraq war. We can all see that there were some grave difficulties with becoming involved [in Iraq]. But many of those who can see them now could not see them on the day.”

We British are effectively at war again - following Iraq (where I supported the removal of Saddam Hussein, though the campaign went pear-shaped shortly afterwwards) and Afghanistan (where little has been achieved after ten years of conflict and 360 British lives lost). I believe that our present leaders have taken leave of their senses in Libya. David Cameron claims world-wide support for 'action.' But Germany isn't with us. Neither is Russia, nor China, nor India, nor Brazil. Even the U.S. was reluctant. Wouldn’t it be better to extricate our armed forces, affected like us all by ‘the ConDem cuts,’ from one serious conflict (Afghanistan) before embarking on yet another (Libya), at a time when an area of the world where we British have strong interests and residual moral responsibilities is crying out for attention? I refer, of course, to Zimbabwe (or as some of us still call that beloved but benighted country, Rhodesia).

Mr Ainsworth and others are right to be worried. What worries me with regard to Libya is what is to replace Gaddafi. Who are these Libyan 'rebels'? Do we know anything of the people on whose side we are at war? And what if what Gaddafi says is true, namely, that al-Qaeda is waiting in the wings? We may rue the day we became involved in what is, essentially, the business of the Libyans.

Peter Brookes gets it again - hypocrisy is on full show

"Top bomb sniffer dog dies after handler is shot dead in Helmand" (News item from The Times, 3rd March)

A dog that held the record for finding the most home-made bombs and weapons in Afghanistan has died after his handler was killed.

Theo, a 22-month-old springer spaniel cross, and Lance Corporal Liam Tasker, 26, of the Royal Army Veterinary Corps, 1st Military Working Dog Regiment, came under small arms fire in the Nahr-e Saraj district in Helmand Province on Tuesday.

Lance Corporal Tasker, who was from Kirkcaldy, Fife, was shot dead and it is understood that Theo died from a seizure at Camp Bastion. As an Arms Explosive Search dog, Theo was the “front man” of the patrol.

Theo, who was donated to the Army by a member of the public, had been on his first six-month tour of duty in Afghanistan with the Theatre Military Working Dog Support Unit, based at Camp Bastion, but its tour was extended a month after it sniffed out 14 weapons and improvised explosive devices in his first five months.

Lance Corporal Tasker had initially joined the Army in 2001 as a vehicle mechanic but his passion for dogs led to a transfer to the Royal Army Veterinary Corps six years later.

Speaking last month, Lance Corporal Tasker had said he did not know that the dog support unit existed until a friend showed him videos of the dogs at work. “I love my job and working together with Theo. He has great character and never tires. He can’t wait to get out and do his job,” he said.

Lieutenant-Colonel David Thorpe, Commanding Officer, 1st Military Working Dog Regiment, said: “It’s a challenge to put into words what Lance Corporal Tasker meant to those he worked with. To his friends he was a mate who could put a smile on your face. He was that man who you wanted around and who you wanted to spend time with.He genuinely loved the dogs he worked with.”

Lance Corporal Tasker’s death brings to 358 the number of British military personnel to have died in Afghanistan since operations began in 2001.

In a statement released through the Ministry of Defence, his family said: “There are three words that best describe Liam: larger than life. He lit up every room he walked into with his cheeky smile. He was the best son, grandson, brother and friend you could ever wish to meet.

“He died a hero doing a job he was immensely passionate about. We are so proud of him and everything he’s achieved. Words can’t describe how sorely he will be missed.”

His girlfriend, Leah Walters, said: “LT never met anyone without touching their lives in some way. The amount of support both I and his family have received in the last day alone pays testament to this.

“I am the proudest girlfriend there could ever be and there will be an LT-sized hole in my life forever.”

A spokesman for the MoD said: “We believe the dog may have died from a seizure. A post-mortem will be conducted to determine what the cause of death was.”

Theo may, however, be in line for an animal bravery award from the veterinary charity the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals. The PDSA, which awards medals to cats, horses, pigeons and dogs for acts of bravery or exceptional duty, has awarded 27 dogs the Dickin Medal since 1944.

The last dog to be awarded a medal was Treo, a labrador, who was killed in Helmand Province in August.

A PDSA spokesman said: “The normal process is for a nomination to made to the PDSA, citing out the circumstances of the animal’s particular deeds. Theo’s nomination can come from a member of the public, but usually we receive nominations from the Armed Forces themselves. We would welcome any nomination in an instance like this.”

My on-line comment is as follows:

"Bring them all home, the brave men and the brave dogs."

And here is the link to the Daily Mail reportage of the return to England of the late Lance Corporal Liam Tasker and the late Theo, his dog -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365070/The-Canine-Honour-Guard-Dogs-turn-sympathy-army-handlers-funeral.html

Our government seems to have been slow off the mark

Our government seems to have been slow off the mark in getting our people out of Libya. Peter Brookes of The Times brilliantly illustrates the point in today's paper.

I just love Peter Brookes. I am less enthusiastic about our government.

Good news in the Cambridge News - crush 'em all!

Here's the picture that pleases and here's the link to the good news in the Cambridge News:

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home/Illegal-hare-coursers-find-its-a-crushing-experience.htm

As a follow-up, I have sent the following letter to the Cambridge News:

ALL hare coursing is illegal!

Dear Editor,

Congratulations and thanks to our Cambridgeshire police for catching hare coursers and to our Ely magistrates for ordering their vehicle to be crushed.

However, your headline, 'Illegal hare coursers find it's a crushing experience,' has the potential to mislead. Thanks to the Hunting Act 2004 (which was passed with support from all parties), ALL hare coursing is now illegal, as are other so-called 'sports' such as fox hunting and stag hunting.

I write this as a farmer and as a born-and-bred countryman and I know that there are millions like me who do not wish to see re-legalised these loathsome practices.

Keep it up, Cambridgeshire police and magistrates: crush 'em all!

Yours sincerely,

Geoffrey Woollard.

Facebook asks, 'What's on your mind?' Afghanistan!

I belong to Facebook. The Facebook system asks subscribers what's on their minds. Here is my answer posted just now:

"What's on my mind? Why, Afghanistan, of course. News has come via the BBC that two more of our brave soldiers have been killed in that hell-hole today. The total of British deaths is now 354. The killing must stop. Bring our boys home now."

I wrote to my M.P., Mr James Paice, on the 9th of June, 2008 (by which date 100 British soldiers had died 'over there'), as follows:

"The news from Afghanistan of three more British deaths is profoundly saddening and worrying. I recall President Bush (the idiot who can’t even pronounce the word ‘nuclear’ properly) declaring, after what the Americans call "9/11," that he/they/we were ‘gonna smoke him [Osama bin Laden] out.’ I supported the intention of doing that but bin Laden hasn’t been found, let alone been ‘smoked out,’ after nearly seven years. It appears to me that the time has come for us to draw a line under a disaster and to tell Mr Bush that one hundred British lives lost is enough. The British Empire (which I still hanker for) failed to tame the Afghans, the Soviet Empire admitted defeat at their hands and still we think that we can succeed where others failed and fell. If I thought that there was still a possibility of ‘smoking out’ Mr bin Laden, I would support as stoutly as anyone the continuing sacrifices of ourselves and the Americans. But I can’t help thinking that ‘special forces’ might have more success than our armies and that the latter should be withdrawn forthwith."

I wasted my time, for nothing has changed, except that we have lost 254 more of our brave British service-men during the past two and a half-plus years.

This war must be ended and I don't care how it is ended. We and our American allies are on to a loser.

Amazon review - 'Supermac' - I gave it four stars only

I love reading. I never liked Harold Macmillan. I reckon that buying [£14.75 from Amazon] and reading Supermac was an exercise in masochism. Nevertheless, the book provided a very good read and I am grateful to Richard Thorpe for writing what Vernon Bogdanor has described as "the best biography of a post-war British Prime Minister yet written."

For all I know, Thorpe and Bogdanor believe that Macmillan was the best post-war Prime Minister we British had. I beg to disagree. I believe that 'Supermac' was a myth as to his nickname and a fraud and, thankfully, though the book is sympathetic to 'Uncle Harold,' much of the evidence for my verdict on the man is there in print, hundreds of pages of it.

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding the Soviet Union. This seems to have stemmed from his first visit to Stalin's 'Evil Empire' in 1932. Some suspected him of being sympathetic to the Soviets for the rest of his life. Thorpe sets out the main facts that are known and exonerates his subject. I still have doubts.

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding the Cossacks and the White Russians in 1945. As to how much 'in the wrong,' we shall never know, but he was an important figure at the time and the Cossacks and the White Russians suffered and died. Again, Thorpe sets out what he sees as the main facts. Readers must judge. I recommend them to do so.

Macmillan was in the wrong in placing faith in Dwight Eisenhower and John Foster Dulles at the time of Suez. The Americans were working to a different agenda and, though both Ike and Dulles subsequently realised their mistakes, the damage was done and we have been paying for it ever since.

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding the pace of change in Africa. He and his chosen ministers - Butler, Macleod, Maudling, etc. - pushed for a typhoon-type 'wind of change' and the subsequent history of many former component parts of the British Empire in Africa casts doubt on the judgement of the prime pushers.

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding the British economy and 'Keynesianism.' It is clear that his admiration and affection for John Maynard Keynes warped his judgement with dire economic consequences for Great Britain and its standing in the world. (His much later ridiculing of Margaret Thatcher over 'the family silver' was in the same vein, and wrong again).

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding our relations with Europe and the British Empire. In retrospect, it is easy to see that, whilst it was important for political reasons for the European Union to succeed, Macmillan's policies were expensive for the Empire and unsuccessful.

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding the weaknesses of his Cabinet. In his aloof and patrician style - itself something of an act - he couldn't see - or didn't want to see - that the behaviour of such as John Profumo was a gift to the satirists. Indeed, Macmillan himself was a gift to the satirists.

Macmillan was in the wrong regarding President Kennedy and 'Camelot.' Like Ike, Jack Kennedy was working to a different agenda from Macmillan's and, though he was 'family' and regarded 'Uncle Harold' highly, they were in reality as chalk and cheese.

Where Harold Macmillan was in the right was in his going, for Richard Thorpe has set out clearly the key documentation, created at the behest of Macmillan from his hospital bed, that led to the succession in 1963 of Sir Alec Douglas-Home as leader of the Conservative Party and as Prime Minister. Though by no means perfect, Douglas-Home was the very best of a dubious bunch and I, for one, recall well my satisfaction at 'Rab' Butler being 'dished' yet again.

Despite my dislike for Macmillan, I would have given this book five stars were it not, first, for the too-extensive notes - 150 pages of them - some of which might more usefully have been edited or omitted and some incorporated into the text or inserted as footnotes on the relevant pages. The latter type is easier to take in than turning frequently to the notes section. And, second, the errors. Books with errors that I can spot myself - the most egregious being reference to Sir Harry Pilkington (later Lord Pilkington) being 'Chairman of the Federation of the Bank of England' when he was president of Federation of British Industries - worry me, for if I can spot some errors, those who are more expert and knowledgeable than I must be able to spot more and, if there are more errors, how does the average reader know what to take as fact?

Finally, I found myself cheering 'Supermac' when I read the following:

'Rule one in politics, he [Macmillan] often declared, was NEVER INVADE AFGHANISTAN [in capital letters]' (page 605). Intriguingly, I have not been able to find any reference to Mr Macmillan having said this. If he did, good for him: if he didn't, Richard Thorpe has made another mistake and has been a naughty boy.

So, good read, yes. Admirable subject, no. Overall, four stars.

Yet another British soldier has been killed in Afganistan

I feel ill - literally.

Yet another British soldier has been killed in Afganistan.

The total of British deaths is now 350.

Our American allies have lost many, many more but that doesn't make it any easier to bear.

Bring them all home now.

For more information, go to the BBC website at -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12279129

Warsi and 'bigotry' and 'prejudice' towards Muslims

Baroness Warsi, the Conservative Party chairman, is reported to be complaining about 'bigotry' and 'prejudice' towards Muslims.

I mourn the passing of my younger days when there were very few Muslims in this country and certainly no prejudice towards them. Our country's problems in this respect started with the influx of these people with their alien attitudes and the problems have been exacerbated by the alien behaviour of some of the Muslims. Islam and the Muslims are imported problems. As Enoch Powell said, 'We must be mad.'

Here is the link to the report in the Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8270294/Tory-chief-Baroness-Warsi-attacks-bigotry-against-Muslims.html

And here is a picture of Burqa-clad women in Luton, a town once famous for straw hat making and now infamous for other things.

Peter Brookes skewers Andrew Lansley - deservedly

"Andrew Lansley argues that the roll-out of GP consortiums — the new doctor-led bodies which will decide on the purchasing of most care in the NHS — is being embraced by the service and now covers more than half the country."

So far as I know, neither Lansley nor anyone else ever said a word about all this before the election. The NHS was doing well until then. Why the hell does the new chap want to change the system yet again?

If he b*****s it up, he'll never be forgiven.

Robin Page has written a piece in the Daily Telegraph

Robin Page has written a piece in the Daily Telegraph, as follows:

"On New Year’s Day a large crowd assembled for the hunt; it included local farmer made good Peter Kendall, president of the National Farmers’ Union, with his family. At last, an NFU president who seems to understand ordinary farmers and rural communities. It was good, too, to see his mother, Jasmine, still following the hounds on horseback at 82.

Two years ago when assorted foxhunters told me that I had to vote Tory whenever the election came, as David Cameron had promised to repeal the hunting ban, I had to disappoint them. Firstly, I don’t hunt (although I support it). Secondly, the Tories are lightweight on several real issues, such as the EU, so why should I give them my vote?

And thirdly, many suburban Tories were obviously going to change their minds on the issue as soon as they were elected, and did, so why bother? Interesting isn’t it? Labour MP, sorry, ex-Labour MP, Phil Woolas, gets thrown out of the Commons for lying about an opponent. Yet any number of MPs told absolute whoppers to their electorates at the election but they are allowed to stay, completely untouched and untarnished. Sorry to all those who worked hard to get numerous Tories elected. I told you so."

The link to the piece is here -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/outdoors/8257281/Country-diary-My-vote-goes-to-foxhunting-not-MPs.html

- and I have responded on-line as follows:

"I know Robin Page. I like Robin Page. Robin Page is a fellow Cambridgeshire farmer and, like me, a born and bred countryman. He and I agree on some things. The Tories have betrayed many of their supporters, of which I also used to be one. I suppose that their worst betrayal is getting into a Brokeback coalition with the Liberals and then raising taxes which hit the hardest in the rural areas and that they didn't anticipate during the election - 'We have no plans to raise VAT to 20%' - they're liars, the lot of them.

But Mr Page is on less strong ground with regard to fox hunting, hare coursing, stag hunting, etc., for, whilst Cameron, Hague, Herbert, Paice, etc., said that they would permit a free vote, they know now that they no longer have the House of Commons support to make it worthwhile. I hate the so-called 'sports' of fox hunting, hare coursing, stag hunting, etc., because I can't cope with the idea of killing animals for fun. There are millions more like me out here. There are many less like the hunting-supporting and prominent Conservative MEP* whom I advised to go drag hunting instead of 'the real thing' in order to comply with the Hunting Act 2004 (which was passed with support from all parties). Do you know what the 'man' said? 'Drag hunting is like sucking a sweetie with the wrapper on.'

If one sucks this 'sweetie' without 'the wrapper on,' the fox is chased to exhaustion and then torn limb from limb by a number of hounds, not killed by the 'quick nip at the back of the neck,' as the mythologists claim. And what about the foxes that 'go to ground' and are then dug out and thrown, literally, to the hounds? This so-called 'sport' - like hare coursing and stag hunting - is utterly disgusting and those who participate in it ought to be ashamed of themselves. Politicians who back them ought to be doubly ashamed of themselves."

*The 'prominent Conservative MEP,' who is probably something of an embarrassment to the Conservative Party, is Mr Roger Helmer, who 'represents' the East Midlands. Go to -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Helmer

The KonDem Koalition by Peter Brookes (The Times)

''Angry Geoffrey Woollard' says 'Happy New Year!'

I have just sent the following letter to local newspapers. It relates to a local scandal. I hope that it will have an effect. It certainly ought to.

"Dear Editor,

All of our Councils are said to be short of money. Cambridgeshire County Council has 24 acres of arable farm land for sale at Reach. This is good land and it is known to be productive and valuable. I know that the National Trust wants to purchase this land to add to the thousands of acres that the Trust is presently letting go to rack and ruin for its so-called 'Wicken Vision.'

It appears that a selling price for this land has been set by two firms of valuers and if the Trust does not 'complete' the purchase at this price, the land will then be sold on the open market. I understand that the County Council has given the Trust a 'twelve-month window' to raise sufficient funds for the purchase. We don't know what the price is or if a deposit has already been paid or why the Trust has preferentially been given twelve months to pay.

I hear from my County Councillor, Mr David Brown, of Burwell, that the land is being sold 'under current County Council policy.' I think that the County Council, in order to make as much money as possible on behalf of the Council Tax payers, ought to have a policy of selling this land openly. In fairness to Cllr. Brown, he says, 'The current policy is not necessarily a policy I agree with.'

If the two firms of valuers have made the same mess with this land as valuers did when another local farm - the 103-acre Hurdle Hall, also at Reach, which was practically given to the Trust for £300,000 - then the County Council will have let the Council Tax payers down and done yet another underhand and scandalous deal with the Trust.

I submit that no valuers can know what such good land is truly worth to, say, a local farming family, without the land having been marketed openly. I am amazed that the County Council is not marketing the land openly.

As is known, I am not inexperienced in these matters and I have now heard more than enough of these cosy deals done 'under current County Council policy,' and done in secret for the benefit of the National Trust.

The 'current County Council policy,' certainly so far as it affects such land sales to the National Trust, must be changed. Now, before it is too late.

Yours sincerely,

Geoffrey Woollard."

I attached a picture of 'an angry Geoffrey Woollard' pointing out the extent of the land at Reach. Here is the picture.

Happy New Year!

The future is bleak for the Conservatives - unless ...

It was 11 o’clock on the morning of the 19th of October, 1922, when a meeting of Conservative MPs was called to order at the Carlton Club.

Mr Stanley Baldwin remarked that Mr David Lloyd George, the then Coalition Prime Minister, was ‘a dynamic force.’ Mr Baldwin also expressed concern that the Liberal Mr Lloyd George might destroy the Conservative Party if he were to be permitted to carry on as head of the government.

It was decided that Conservative participation in the Coalition should cease. It ceased and Mr Baldwin soon became leader of the Conservative Party. Thus was born the 1922 Committee.

Of course, the present Prime Minister is not a Liberal (or is he?). And the present Liberal Democrat leader is neither Prime Minister nor anything to touch Mr Lloyd George. But there is a parallel. The Conservative Party is in danger of being destroyed today. Mr Graham Brady, M.P., is now the chairman of the 1922 Committee.

Many Conservatives believe that Mr Brady should do his duty and rid us of this ConDem Coalition government.

Come out of the shadows, Mr Brady.

Another Amazon review - this is a gem, get it now!

"Despite there being one or two earlier criticisms from others, 'A World On Fire,' at Amazon's present price and with 1,000 plus pages, works out at just over a penny per page. Every page is a gem. Get it now.

This is a great big book so, if prospective purchasers don't fancy great big books, would they please stop reading this review now.

On the other hand, if prospective purchasers can cope with a great big book (9 ½ inches by 6 ½ inches by 2 ½ inches weighing about 3 ¾ lbs.), this is a work or rare genius, and I would go so far as to say that, for general historical readers and for 'Civil War' buffs in particular, 'A World On Fire' is a must-have and the book of the decade. It is wonderfully well written and a really great read.

One of the most insightful quotations in Amanda Foreman's masterpiece is by the British writer, William Michael Rosetti (brother of the artist Dante Gabriel Rosetti), who said that, during the war, expressions such as "'I am a Northerner," and "I am a Southerner"' were 'as common on Englishmen's lips as "I am a Liberal" or "I am a Conservative."' The partisan nature of the terrible strife was as much a part of the then British psyche and political scene as it was in America.

Though I am British, I have known since I was a child that I was a Southerner and I recall as if it were yesterday the day I first set foot in Virginia. I was in my spiritual home. It just felt right. I have never felt the need nor the desire to change my attitude and preference.

My guess is that the author is a Northerner in sympathy, but I absolve her of all partisan feelings as she has done her best to present the respective Northern and Southern causes in a fair light. Moreover, she shows an exceptional understanding of the sympathies of both British and American people, not only those who participated but also those who were interested but powerless bystanders like the hundreds of thousands of cotton workers thrown out of work by what was going on over the ocean.

It has been suggested that Ms. Foreman's work should have been better edited. Editing implies correction or cutting. I see no need for correction - other than the three typographical errors that I twigged - and certainly no need for cutting, for, if anything, the book leaves much out and isn't long enough. I could have coped with another 1,000 pages at least.

I was proud to read of distant relatives of both my wife and myself who had played parts on both sides (North and South) and on both sides of the ocean. Abraham Lincoln and William Henry Seward are studied thoroughly and it is again clear to me that Seward, as a drunk, was no credit to the State Department whilst Lincoln can never be absolved from the prime charge of the people of the South, namely, that he raised a great army to invade their states. That army burned houses and destroyed farms wherever it went, right from the start. Poor Virginia, indeed. Incidentally, the book's title is probably derived from the words of the drunken and irresponsible Seward - 'We will wrap the whole world in flames' (page 189).

An unexpected (to me) Southern hero was the British war artist and correspondent Frank Vizetelly (1830 - 1883), whose drawings graced the pages of the Illustrated London News. I had seen some of them before but I had not known what an important part this man had played, being on hand almost throughout and at the end of President Davis's doomed leadership of the equally doomed Confederate States. The book, already a magnum opus, is made better still by the inclusion of much of Mr Vizetelly's marvellous work.

Hundreds of books have been written about the American 'Civil War' (or 'War of Northern Aggression' or 'War for Southern Independence') and all bar a few describe the bitter divisions between peoples of similar blood and the almost indescribable suffering, especially of those in the invaded South. This superlative and stupendous tome succeeds as well as any other because it includes so many first-hand (and, in some cases, new) accounts of individual participants and on-the-spot observers.

The book's greatest strength - and its primary purpose - is its success in showing how important was the attitude of Great Britain and the British people. There were many occasions when British intervention could (and should?) have ensured the ending of the slaughter and there were more occasions than I knew of when Great Britain and the Lincoln regime might have found themselves at war. The then future of Canada was at stake, as was the governance of Mexico, for which France yearned.

Aside from Frank Vizetelly and many others who are mentioned and quoted at length, two more Southern heroes were Swiss-born Henry Hotze (1833 - 1887), a master of propaganda who worked with my Cambridgeshire-born cousin, John George Witt (1836 - 1906), and James Dunwoody Bulloch (1823 - 1901), uncle of Teddy Roosevelt and one of the Confederacy's principal agents in Great Britain. I have read of both previously, thanks to Amazon. Intriguingly, one of the Amazon critics of 'A World On Fire' is one James Bulloch. If the latter Mr Bulloch is a relative of the former Mr Bulloch, I forgive his criticisms and defer to his knowledge. If he is not, I hope that potential purchasers will give more weight to my remarks and buy this magnificent book that is enormously impressive in both scale and scope."

P.S. Here is the link to the above on Amazon.co.uk:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/World-Fire-History-Nations-Divided/dp/1846142040/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1293363980&sr=8-1

P.P.S. I have bought three copies of this book. One I have read and kept myself. Two I have given to two of my well-read and illustrious brothers-in-law. I hope that each enjoys it as much as I have.