JPod, I’m sorry if what Parris says has upset you, but rather than just being upset, could you explain what it is that Parris has said that is so unacceptable? Yes, some of his language is harsh, but, as I’ve pointed out before in the course of our discussions about Blair, it’s hardly unusual in the context of Britain’s tradition of robust political discourse, or for that matter your own. I haven’t had the chance to see if you might have ever been a bit rough with Bill Clinton, but to take just one example of your own pugilistic style (albeit on a softer target) here’s what you wrote about Al Gore in the wake of one of that poor man’s more excitable performances, “It is now clear that Al Gore is insane. I don’t mean that his policy ideas are insane, though many of them are. I mean that based on his behavior, conduct, mien and tone over the past two days, there is every reason to believe that Albert Gore Jr., desperately needs help. I think he needs medication, and I think that if he is already on medication, his doctors need to adjust it or change it entirely.” Good knockabout stuff, all of it, but if you dish it out, you are hardly in a position to complain when others use similar language about people you admire, unless, of course, you think it’s unfair. And if you think that Parris was unfair, you have to say why. Repeating the fine words from that Blair speech is not enough. Blair can be eloquent (who’d deny it?), sometimes marvelously so, and, yes, as I have repeatedly said myself, he has got some very big things right. Credit (lots of it) where credit is due, but the fact that he has got those things right does not detract from much of the criticism against him. His critics are describing him as a scoundrel, not a fool.

As for the performance of the British economy since Blair was elected, I can only suggest, John, that you do a little more homework. For all the absolute growth, it’s very clear that the underlying picture has been one of relative decay. Put simply, Blair has squandered the legacy left to him by nearly twenty years of Conservative economic reforms. The only real surprise has been that he took longer to do this than was expected back in 1997. For that too, I suppose, he should be given some credit. Sort of.