No 3602 Set by George Cowley

Ian Hargreaves wrote in the NS that "journalists never know when to admit they don't have the answer". We asked for a piece of writing by a journalist (or anyone appropriate) where the author is obviously floundering.

Report by Ms de Meaner

Hmm. A number of extremely funny entries that didn't quite follow the rules. I wanted you to choose something along the lines of politicians' speeches or memoirs, if journalists weren't quite to your taste. Not, for example, what Anne Du Croz sent in, which was a letter from a head teacher to a parent ("Possibly due to an oversight I can find no cheque to cover Barry's next term with us"). And I didn't want it so set up as John O'Byrne's financial column written by a sports journalist ("When I heard that the Footsie had fallen 200 points in one day . . . I knew this was really bad for England and could relegate us to the bottom of the European league"). And I didn't think I was asking for stuff from the green-ink brigade, prime examples being Sid Field's entry on global warming ("Carbon dioxide is heavier than both oxygen and nitrogen . . . The increased downward pressure exerted by the gas will push the major land masses apart. As a result Europe will impinge on North America in the not-too-distant future, perhaps within a few generations' time") and Will Bellenger's managing to blame (so topical!) the whole of the Cambodian holocaust on a single cause ("the imposition of a francophone culture upon two mutually oppressive peoples - the Viets and the Khmers"). However, one day I shall certainly set these comps and I expect you to send these entries in again. A genuine hon mensh to Ian Birchall, also on the nasty French, this time the beef war ("You have only to look at a field of decent, healthy, contented English cows to know they are being fed on the proper diet. After all, everybody knows what cows ought to be fed on. There's no need to spell it out. Cows have been eating it throughout our 1,000-year history. So clearly it can't be anything that does them harm"). £15 to the winners, and the bottle of champers to G M Davis.

So, you ask me now, what should I have done about Mrs Thatcher? At first sight, the question is simple - should I have continued to let her interfere with my leadership, or should I have taken a firm stand, ignoring her slights from near and afar, although in doing so I could have incurred the wrath of those in the party who thought she was the saviour of Britain, if not the world. There was a middle way, of course, though not the Third Way promoted by Tony Blair, but the tightrope between two abysses, or should I say, hazards. The fire and the frying pan come to mind. Yet this was the way I probably should have taken. Each step would have been an act of faith, a stride into the unknown, rather like the scene where Indiana Jones steps out into what seems to be certain death in a bottomless chasm. Courage would have been needed, perhaps more than I could muster at the time, given the lack of trust on the part of those who should have held me up and given me firm ground on which to stand. That was certainly the way forward, yes.

Katie Mallett

Is trying to forecast the result of the next election as pointless as wondering why the Booker prize doesn't throw up another Dickens? Or whether we'd want one if it did?

But to get back to politics. There are those who say Blair v Hague is no contest anyway. And who can say the electorate may not fall for the charms of a new face? Charles Kennedy should not, perhaps, be underestimated. There again, would the electorate want him if we got him?

What does he stand for? Indeed, what do Blair and Hague stand for? Where is the Labour Party going? And will Mandelson go with it? Will the left plot against him? Probably. But will it do them any good? Or him?

And the Tories. What are they about? Will Portillo keep quiet? And what about Ken Clarke? Is he a closet Blairite?

Then there is the question of Mrs Blair. Is she a good thing for the Tories? Or for old Labour? Or new Labour? It is difficult to say. She keeps a low profile.

There are those who think these speculations are fruitless. Not I. They are the very essence of politics.

Margaret Rogers

News of Peter Mandelson's appointment as Northern Ireland Secretary has many people guessing, but probably points to a definitive break with the new Labour tradition of giving the post to a proactive female cabinet member. Mandelson may, of course, prove to be proactive, and to some extent more acceptable than Dr Mowlam (with whom, interestingly, he shares an initial), but there are signs that the DUP and the RUC may not welcome him with open arms. Though the response from the IRA and INLA has been muted and ambiguous, key republican figures have been, in the opinion of some close observers, perceptibly less dogmatic in their reticence than loyalist leaders such as Trimble who, however, is believed not to have ruled out the possibility of future initiatives in another direction. What is certain is that the current situation, if it is not fully stabilised, promises future developments that will entail change - and preparedness for change is one of the factors that will determine the outcome. Close analysis of the Ulster dynamic suggests that Mandelson will need both to talk and to listen if the dialogue over the Good Friday Agreement is to continue. Only time will tell.

G M Davis

No 3605 Set by John Crick

We want something to commemorate the passing of the hereditary peers in the Lords. How about a counselling session or an interview in a Job Centre? Or how about giving one of them a reference? Max 200 words and in by 18 November.

E-mail: comp@newstatesman.co.uk

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website