Introducing Alastair Campbell

Shortly to guest edit the <em>New Statesman</em>, Tony Blair's former press secretary explains why h

I’m very grateful to the New Statesman for giving me the chance to be guest editor for a week. It has not always been my favourite reading, and no doubt there are some regular readers for whom I would not be Number 1 choice as guest editor.

But it continues to hold a significant place in the political and media landscape and I hope that for the week I am in charge, with the help of the usual NS team, we can put together something that is interesting, provocative and makes a contribution to debate on the progressive side of politics. I have already commissioned a few pieces from people as varied as myself, my partner and friends and colleagues in places high and low. But there are a couple of ideas, as I mentioned on my website, when I first announced I would be doing this, that will require reader input. First, I am on the lookout for three young people, 16-18, to tell us why they have joined one of the three main parties.

It angers me when middle-aged middle class people routinely say that young people are not interested in politics. My sense is that in many ways the young are more interested in political debate than the old. They’re just turned off by the way politics is debated and covered.

The second idea, which has already had some good ideas sent to my blog, is to ask readers to complete this sentence ...

"If I had one sentence to put into Labour’s manifesto for the next election, it would say this –"

The Tories may be ahead in the polls, but I still think the battle of ideas and serious policy debate on the left has more energy. I hope your response shows this. I have set one page aside already but if the response merits more, then I may have to spike one of my own pieces. If that isn’t an incentive ....

Contribute your own one sentence ideas for the Labour manifesto on Alastair Campbell's blog.

HEINZ BAUMANN/GALLERY STOCK
Show Hide image

With the BBC Food’s collection under threat, here's how to make the most of online recipes

Do a bit of digging, trust your instincts – and always read the comments.

I don’t think John Humphrys is much of a chef. Recently, as his Today co-presenter Mishal Husain was discussing the implications of the BBC’s decision to axe its Food website (since commuted to transportation to the Good Food platform, run by its commercial arm), sharp-eared listeners heard the Humph claim that fewer recipes on the web could only be a good thing. “It would make it easier!” he bellowed in the background. “We wouldn’t have to choose between so many!”

Husain also seemed puzzled as to why anyone would need more than one recipe for spaghetti bolognese – but, as any keen cook knows, you can never have too many different takes on a dish. Just as you wouldn’t want to get all your news from a single source, it would be a sad thing to eat the same bolognese for the rest of your life. Sometimes only a molto autentico version, as laid down by a fierce Italian donna, rich with tradition and chopped liver, will do – and sometimes, though you would never admit it in a national magazine, you crave the comfort of your mum’s spag bol with grated cheddar.

The world wouldn’t starve without BBC Food’s collection but, given that an online search for “spaghetti bolognese recipe” turns up about a million results, it would have been sad to have lost one of the internet’s more trustworthy sources of information. As someone who spends a large part of each week researching and testing recipes, I can assure you that genuinely reliable ones are rarer than decent chips after closing time. But although it is certainly the only place you’ll find the Most Haunted host Yvette Fielding’s kedgeree alongside Heston Blumenthal’s snail porridge, the BBC website is not the only one that is worth your time.

The good thing about newspaper, magazine and other commercial platforms is that most still have just enough budget to ensure that their recipes will have been made at least twice – once by the writer and once for the accompanying photographs – though sadly the days when everyone employed an independent recipe tester are long gone. Such sites also often have sufficient traffic to generate a useful volume of comments. I never make a recipe without scrolling down to see what other people have said about it. Get past the “Can’t wait to make this!” brigade; ignore the annoying people who swap baked beans for lentils and then complain, “This is nothing like dhal”; and there’s usually some sensible advice in there, too.

But what about when you leave the safety of the big boys and venture into the no man’s land of the personal blog? How do you separate the wheat from the chaff and find a recipe that actually works? You can often tell how much work a writer has put in by the level of detail they go into: if they have indicated how many people it serves, or where to find unusual ingredients, suggested possible tweaks and credited their original sources, they have probably made the dish more than once. The photography is another handy clue. You don’t have to be Annie Leibovitz to provide a good idea of what the finished dish ought to look like.

Do a bit of digging as part of your prep. If you like the look of the rest of the site, the author’s tastes will probably chime with your own. And always, always, wherever the recipe is from, read it all the way through, even before you order the shopping. There is nothing more annoying than getting halfway through and then realising that you need a hand blender to finish the dish, just as the first guest arrives.

Above all, trust your instincts. If the cooking time seems far too short, or the salt content ridiculously high, it probably is, so keep an eye on that oven, check that casserole, keep tasting that sauce. As someone who once published a magic mince pie recipe without any sugar, I’m living proof that, occasionally, even the very best of us make mistakes. 

Felicity Cloake is the New Statesman’s food columnist. Her latest book is The A-Z of Eating: a Flavour Map for Adventurous Cooks.

This article first appeared in the 26 May 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The Brexit odd squad