SLIPPING in where we left off, Keir Starmer removed a portrait of Margaret Thatcher at No 10. He was then criticised by the usual suspect sources, with Telegraph condemning his ‘act of spite’, while the Mail said he was a ‘political minnow’ when set against a woman of ‘vision, courage and moral clarity’.

Starmer said it’s not about Thatcher, he just doesn’t like ‘pictures of people staring down at him’.

An oddity here is that the painting was commissioned by Gordon Brown after he invited Thatcher to tea at Downing Street.

Whatever the reasons for that commission, it’s best to turn that portrait to the wall, as it were, as Thatcher’s monetarist policies have had many bad consequences.

For starters, her belief in the sanctity of privatised monopolies has given us the crisis at Thames Water, and left us with shit in our rivers and seas.

Oh, and privatised rail services cadging a lift from the state. Oh, and private companies earning a guaranteed fortune off the state, whether or not they do a decent job.

Oh, and as Transparency UK has just reported, £4.1 billion worth of Covid contracts going to those with known connections to the Tory party. And £15 billion in contracts said to have ‘raised corruption red flags’.

And then there is our crazy housing market, created in part by Thatcher’s desire to sell off council homes and turn voters into grateful Tories, and then not replacing those sold-off homes. Added to which around 40% of former council homes are now said to be owned by private landlords.

This, in turn, created a precarious rental market that offers little protection or certainty for tenants (yup, another Thatcher benefit).

George Clarke, architect, writer and broadcaster, said on the Today programme last week that governments over the past 40 years have failed to provide affordable rent for social housing and instead been ‘obsessed with home ownership’, leading to a ‘collapse in the entire system’ (yup, another one).

Here’s an idea. Instead of the state paying housing benefit to people on low incomes – money which in many cases will go straight to private landlords – why not build them social housing?

Another Thatcherite belief, still persistent among many, is that cutting red tape and allowing business to do as it wishes will always bring benefits. What is might also bring, along with other considerations, is the making of avoidable tragedies such as Grenfell.

Not sure where that leaves Thatcher’s ‘moral clarity’, but there you go. Obsessively disliking Thatcher after all these years might not be healthy; but neither is obsessively venerating her while overlooking inconvenient truths.

Having started with art, let’s return there, by shaking a head at the Thatcherite rabble known as the Taxpayers’ Alliance. This obscurely funded organisation was given top billing in a lamentable report on the BBC website.

Birmingham City Council owns an artwork collection valued at almost half a billion pounds, which you might think was good for the people of Birmingham. We have been to the city twice in the past year or so, and each time the art gallery has still been shut for renovation, although the reopening is due to begin next month.

As the council is said to be bankrupt, the Taxpayers’ Alliance says it should sell off its art collection, proving again the worth of that Oscar Wilde quip about a cynic being some who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

According to this thin logic, art has only a financial value and should be flogged off when money is tight. What about art having an intrinsic value to our wellbeing, lifting our spirits and broadening our minds. And what, too, about the fact that such paintings were often given to councils in trust.

As the art historian Dr Bendor Grosvenor said on X/Twitter: “The Taxpayer’s Alliance used to push this daft story every year, as if councils should sell off their museum collections. Bizarrely, the BBC is now pushing the same story, and of course quotes the Taxpayer’s Alliance.”

Art galleries are spaces of joy and marvel that should be treasured and preserved. Doing the alliance’s tawdry bidding would strip Birmingham of its art while solving almost nothing.

But nothing for something is what you get for following Thatcher with your eyes closed.

According to GB News, Nigel Farage sent a ‘brilliant’ response to Sir Keir Starmer over banning smoking outside pubs. Since this struck me as highly unlikely, I had a peep on the website, only to be kept out by the paywall, and needy pleading, “Don’t Let Them Silence You – Support GB News…”

Oh, I’d rather support anything else you might care to mention, so the ‘brilliance’ of Nigel Farage will remain a mystery to me, much as it always has done.

But I’ll tell you this, if GB News is short of money, they should stop bunging so much of it to old sulky-pants. His entry in the Parliamentary Register of Interests records that GB News paid him £97,928.40 for what amounts to 32 hours work a month.

After this story blew up, Farage told the BBC the amount was paid not to him but to his company, “which has significant expenses…sorry to disappoint the media”.

Whatever, it’s a lot of money. But I am not significantly interested to pursue this further. All you need to know is Farage has made himself extremely wealthy by bellowing far-right slogans and pretending to be a man of the people.

Also, as if you need telling, he is a shameless self-publicist and hypocrite, a man happy to spout pious asides such as “sorry to disappoint the media” while at the same time stuffing his pockets with media money.

There’s enough brass in that neck to fashion a whole bed.

True, he’s generally only paid by the right-wing media, with an extra £4,000 a month from the Daily Telegraph for so-called columns, but either he’s part of the media or he’s not.

And as he’s now the almost entirely absent MP for Clacton, he shouldn’t be in the media at all.

Anyway, it was smoking outside pubs that brought us to this juncture. In one of his Telegraph columns – the collective noun for which should surely be ‘argy-bargies’ or ‘spittle-spats’ – Farage said: “I’ll never go to the pub again if outdoor smoking is banned.”

Thank heavens for that. No more fag-ash fascism from the nicotine nasty; no more tarry disagreements. In one sulk he’d be demoted from number one pub bore to plain old bore.

One challenge in such matters is that the personal gets in the way of the general.

For Farage, the personal amounts to the ‘right’ to stage photo-shoots in pubs with compliant press photographers. And the ‘general’ is just to blow this into a bigger matter than it really is.

For me, the personal is a desire to avoid loathsome smoke outside pubs (alongside an undying antipathy to one smoker). It’s not a massive problem, to be honest, as pubs are so much nicer without indoor-smoking. For all that, it’s unsettling as a non-smoker to sit clouded in smoke.

The Express, rumoured to be a newspaper, splashed with: “Pubs warn of smoking ban violence”. That seems a bit strong, unless Farage is about to kick-off at his local, or we are about to see another of those riots that were nothing to do with him.

The stuffy silliness of right-wing newspapers has been heightened by their side no longer being in power. And by their insistence all wrongs are down to Labour, and nothing to do with the previous 14 years.

Further evidence of this was found over at the Mail, where Starmer’s reported removal of a portrait of Margaret Thatcher from what had once been her Downing Street study led to claims of ‘outrage’.

Nope, nobody was outraged by that apart from the permanently wrathful Mail.

Whatever you think of Starmer, it seems fair enough that he might wish to remove a painting of Thatcher. Would you want that on your walls? According to one unnamed former Tory minister, the eyes follow you around the room, which would certainly give one the creeps.

Still, a problem with Starmer’s leadership is that everything comes across as a downer. Banning smoking outside pubs seems fair enough on health grounds and is a much smaller step towards than banning indoor smoking was.

But, blimey, Starmer doesn’t go out of his way to bring joy, does he? Those of us who were thrilled at his election victory need to be given something cheerful to clutch.

Not caring for someone in the news can be down to personal prejudice.

Take me and Kirstie Allsopp. Perhaps you are in the dark about who she might be. If so, feel free to put your feet up on the sofa of blissful ignorance.

Those of us not in that position know Allsopp as a presenter of property programmes such as Location, Location, Location, along with assorted spin-offs. Oh, and a terrible Christmas decoration affair at which I may have slung non-festive barbs.

Why the antipathy? Oh, Allsopp oozes entitlement and class privilege, or she does to me, and she’s always sounding off about things, usually without first checking the irony Geiger counter.

A search of her name of the BBC website reveals the following selection…

Kirstie Allsopp: Parenting ‘isn’t rocket science’…

Kirstie Allsopp’s parenting tips: ‘I smashed my kids’ iPads’…

Kirstie Allsopp leaves Twitter over iPad smashing backlash…

Oh, and don’t forget that time she said young people could afford a home if only they gave up coffee, gym and Netflix – seemingly forgetting her family are said to have helped buy her first property.

These are reasons to be irritated by Allsopp, or my reasons. Perhaps this is unfair, as plenty of people seem to like her, including my wife, who enjoys the property shows and even willingly watches that baubles programme.

So why has Allsopp, who never shies from attention, fallen again from the over-stuffed cupboard of news? She has been contacted by social services after allowing her 15-year-old son to go interrailing around Europe for three weeks with a teenage friend.

All this, or the way it happened, was partly her own fault. When her son returned from his jaunt, Allsopp mentioned his homecoming on X, formerly Twitter (yes, she flounced off but must have flounced back).

Someone then seems to have referred her to social services at Kensington and Chelsea Council, who said they were obliged to act.

Some people on the site were gleeful about Allsopp being shopped, while it was also pointed out that social services intervene far more often in the lives of those far less privileged.

As for those who cry ‘Leave Kirstie alone’, they are likely the same people who complain loudly if social services don’t intervene when they should have.

But against my better sour judgment, I sympathise with Kirstie Allsopp here. Yes, she’s privileged and annoying, and a less advantaged parent might not have sent their child off on an interrailing trip around Europe.

But isn’t she’s right to suggest no harm was done, that her son has learned from the experience (even if her saying all that is still irksome).

Now, I’m afraid, you will now have to put up with another of those probably pointless anecdotes where an ageing columnist plucks something they once did from the drawer of dim distance. Does this help or add anything – who knows, but here goes.

In 1970, aged 14, I travelled alone from suburban Manchester to Brussels to stay with a family who’d been our neighbours in the cul-de-sac. Little about the journey has stayed in my mind, but as this was long before the Channel Tunnell opened in 1994, I must have caught the train to London, then another to the coast, then crossed the sea, then caught another train to Brussels.

It is possible these arrangements are not as remembered, but it was eons ago. However I got there, nothing about that trip now seems remarkable. There and back, no harm done. Not as adventurous as the Allsopp boy, but a shaping experience.

It is still possible to wonder at the lack of something more important to report. But as I’ve managed around 600 words on this so far, the sin of giving Kirstie too much attention has been committed here, too.

But just because someone is maddening doesn’t mean they aren’t right sometimes.

NOT much politics here today – we all need a rest – but it has been interesting to see the row-about-nothing-much concerning the Labour peer and party donor Waheed Alli.

Depending on who you believe, Alli either has or temporarily had a pass to Downing Street. This bit of no-news prompts the Daily Flail to wring its hands about ‘Sleaze rotting our politics to the core.’

Perhaps that was a headline left over from the Boris Johnson days of gold wallpaper, Tory backers or mates being given lucrative Covid contracts and boozy lockdown parties in Downing Street. Except, of course, the Mail – and the Telegraph – forgot to report much about any of that.

No reason why there won’t been a Labour scandal sometime or other, but this one’s surely a non-starter.

THE newsprint is yellowing, dating as it does to August 25, 1990. There are two photographs of squash players on that old paper, or one proper squash player and one bumbler.

The kosher hitter of the small round ball is Simon Parke, then 18, who would go on to be number 3 in the world. He would also survive testicular cancer five years later and is now a squash commentator.

The other man is me, qualified only to commentate on a lifetime of not being much cop at hitting that uncooperative rubber sphere around an airless room.

Rackets have occasionally been tossed on to the floor in exasperation, but that’s how it goes when you used to be the third best player in the world. Sorry, that’s how it goes when mostly you’re the third worst player in any gathering of three hitters of the small round ball.

The rediscovered feature is from my old newspaper and was called Have A Go! – the headline was ‘Sporting ambitions are soon squashed!’

That’s two exclamation marks on one page, probably two too many.

Keith Waterhouse, that great newspaper columnist and purveyor of good style, used to disparage this over-enthusiastic bit of punctuation, saying: ‘A sentence that falls flat without an exclamation mark is a flat sentence. The exclamation mark will not inject drama into it. It must be re-cast.’

Something else that should have been re-cast a long time ago is my pretence to being any good at squash. But the thing is, I like the game, and it’s kept me fairly fit (and sometimes furious) for decades now.

At the time of writing that feature, I was 33 years old. In the pictures I look youthful and still have a decent amount of dark curly hair; not so much on either count in the mirror today, with a few lines and any remaining hair turning grey.

It’s not comfortable to confront such evidence of how one has aged, but then none of us escape that. What’s more interesting is how this one average player has kept on for so long.

Simon Parke, who thrashed me 9-0, 9-0, 9-1 in our trial game, had his health struggles with cancer at a young age, while I suffered a heart attack six months ago.

The recovery advice given to me at first was to avoid squash. Too much explosive running around. Not when I’m playing, I said. Eventually I was told it would be OK to carry on, as I’d played for so long.

In that feature Parke said squash was “a simple game, really, very simple”. He advised hitting the ball while aiming for a certain position on the wall, adding that this would help me to know where the ball was going to end up. Where I don’t want it to be is often the answer to that.

It is surprising in life how often you can be told things you find difficult are really quite simple. Hitting a squash ball properly, keeping time while playing the guitar, writing novels that people might want to read. Oh, and baking sourdough bread that rises in fluffy magnificence, rather than struggling to summon the necessary whoosh.

Still, keeping doing things is better than not doing them.

At the time of that feature, Parke was about to begin his third season as a professional and his world ranking had risen to 24. At the time of writing this, I played yesterday and lost again, but did win one game, so here’s to the amplification of small victories.

On the wall before me in the study is a framed copy of the mock-up page presented to me when I left the paper nine years ago. This has a strap teasing what’s ‘inside’ the rest of the paper: ‘Eight-page souvenir supplement on Julian’s rare squash win.’

My squash playing is a long-running joke, you see. But against the odds, I’m still at it.

A working society is like a large window. You can’t see that window doing its job as it does so in a transparent, window-like way.

Then a passing thug lobs a brick. The window smashes and the shit-stirrers who encouraged the yob say, ‘Oh, look at the jagged edges on that window. That window isn’t safe. We told everyone this would happen, and no-one listened.’

The outrageous disturbances we have seen in the past week seem to have been agitated from a safe distance by those who churn out hate on their laptops or release dangerously disingenuous video statements.

I went looking for a quote about this and found one from the writer and lecturer Tom Scott:

“What Richard Tice, Nigel Farage & Reform are doing is straight out of the Fascism by Numbers playbook: 1) Stoke fear & hatred of a minority group 2) Feign outrage at ensuing chaos & violence 3) Blame government for this 4) Pose as the party that will “restore law & order”.

This is quite true. Reform and their far-right buddies know only negativity and disruption; their barely hidden desire is to cause chaos and then cash in their chaos chips.

Let’s admit to the wider problem here. That good quote from Scott came from X/Twitter, a place turned by Elon Musk into a right-wing echo chamber too often filled with nastiness.

As an example of this, Musk gave Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-right agitator who pretends to be called Tommy Robinson, his platform back.

And X/Twitter was one of the ways Yaxley-Lennon stirred up his supporters to go on thuggish rampage. He didn’t so much predict a riot as apparently help to cause it, all from the sweaty safety of his holiday sun lounger.

So why stay on X/Twitter? Only because of those who answer back with clarity and passion, such as Tom Scott and the LBC broadcaster James O’Brien, and many other enlightened souls.

But let’s go back to that broken window.

Those disturbances across the country happened after three girls under the age of 10 were killed at a dance workshop in Southport. They died in an horrific knife attack that left eight more children and two adults seriously injured.

A time for shock and appalled reflection; a time to leave loved ones to grieve and cry over their unimaginable loss, or so a normal person might suppose.

Not so the far-right racists. They seemingly saw this tragedy as an opportunity. What sort of a cruel twister do you have to be to rub your hands and say, oh, this works well for us; to set about spreading false rumours about the identity of the attacker – to even invent a Muslim-sounding name, complete with dark hints that he’d just arrived in a small boat.

Nigel Farage, as ever, was mealy-mouthing his way round the fringes, releasing a video about the killings in which he questioned whether the truth about the attacker was “being withheld from us” by the police.

A disgraceful act from a serving MP, as that is what he now is, but typical of his gruesome nudge-nudge political circus act.

Southport, a strong community town, should have been left to mourn its unimaginable loss. Instead far-right racist thugs travelled there for the day to riot and wreck the place, doing much damage and attacking the mosque.

All of this orchestrated anger has, absurdly, been blamed by some on Sir Keir Starmer, prime minister for four weeks. Glance over your shoulder instead at 14 years of Conservative rule; all that time spent going on endlessly about migration and small boats, while only making the situation worse.

Look, too, at how the Tories targeted ‘outsiders’ and exercised their obsession with Islamic extremists yet refused to heed warnings about far-right extremism.

Starmer has been careful with his words, but that hasn’t stopped a background chant that he is against white working people.

Such crackpot ideas run alongside conspiracy theories that far-right ‘protesters’ (sorry, racist thugs) are treated more harshly because they are white and right-wing.

This is the “two-tier policing” urban myth, another bit of truth twisting that ignores inconvenient evidence, such as the harsh treatment of environmental protesters.

In this Trumpian, Musk-moulded world of social media, and across the alternative news networks, the truth is any sharp shape you want it to be. Older forms of media have long whistled that tune, too. The Daily Mail might now attack Musk for being ‘wildly irresponsible’ but just look at all those front pages here.

Wishing to end with something positive, let’s turn away from the window smashers, the shouters and the racist idiots, and instead praise those of all faith and background who swept the streets clear of the broken glass, rebuilt the fallen walls, mended the mosques. Chief among them was Mike Ainscough, 82, from Southport, who removed the cuddly toys, messages and flowers from outside his home every night, putting them back  in the morning.

‘I felt it was something I could so,’ as he told Lizzie Dearden of the Observer.

Another day breaks, more riotous assembly is predicted, shop windows are boarded up, but instead anti-fascist protesters come out in force, seeing off the far-right with chants in Liverpool of ‘Scousers, united, will never be defeated’, while in Bristol people reportedly chatted, listened to music, and joined in anti-fascist chants, holding up signs reading “fascists are the minority” and “refugees are welcome”.

A great chant earlier in the week greeted the far-right in Bristol too – ‘We are many, you are few. We are Bristol, who are you?’

And just look at that front page of the Times this morning, showing anti-fascist protesters in East London.

There is still hope after all.

Lincolnshire Poacher cheese

CHEESE is often on my mind, especially since the heart attack. That unfortunate event sorely tested my enduring love of cheese on toast.

It had always been a weekly treat, sometimes more often. If a week is a long time in politics, it’s even longer to a man who craves cheese on toast again.

My previous level of cheese eating was discouraged by the cardiac nurse at home. The cardio physio (a real one and not a jokey disguise for my wife) suggested a matchbox-sized portion of cheese was fine, although in cheesy mitigation I would point out matches and the boxes containing them come in varying sizes.

Anyway, all of this is why a headline in The Observer caught my longing eye: “Stronger, stinkier, softer: how Britain fell in love with cheese beyond cheddar…”

In another life, I wrote headlines in that newspaper, and would have been pleased with that one, especially the air of deliquescent alliteration conjured at the start.

The closing dig is less worthy of praise, as a good cheddar is still for my cheese-buying moolah king of British coagulated milk protein, although stilton also has a mouldy claim to that title, too.

The story beneath that nicely whiffy headline was another of those food yarns promoted to the news pages. You know the sort of thing: we’ve all gone vegan; nobody drinks alcohol any more… words to be annulled at a later date when we learn everyone’s gone off being vegan and we’re back on the booze, possibly to dull the memory of all that vegan food.

The tasty nub of this one was that “British customers are more cheese curious than ever before”.

Some of us have always been cheese curious, all too eager to investigate the cheese platter.

What this report said is that sales of halloumi and cottage cheese are on the rise, while “burrata is working hard to supplant mozzarella”. That makes it sound like a race, the 100-metere cheese sprint, but I have no argument with what followed: “Cheeses like comté are now a standard part of a supermarket’s deli range.”

Ah, comté – that most glorious of hard French cheeses, nutty tasting and hits the spot every time. An unpasteurised cheese, as the good ones often are, including another favourite, Lincolnshire Poacher.

The report quoted Jonny Crickmore, the nicely named chairman of the UK’s Specialist Cheesemakers Association.

“We started making a brie-style cheese because we saw that even though brie sales were growing year on year, no one was making a similar soft cheese. Lots of small specialist cheesemakers across the UK are creating their own versions of classic international cheeses,” Mr Crickmore said.

Blessed are the cheesemakers, as that Monty Python misunderstanding put it all those years ago. British cheeses can now take on the world. We recently bought our eldest son a selection of five cheeses for his birthday – all local stunners from Yorkshire.

Something else drew my attention to that report in the Observer. It said research into the nutritional value of cheese, previously known for its high fat and salt content, has revealed something encouraging.

Prof Ian Givens, director of the Institute of Food, Nutrition and Health, said some data showed a neutral relationship between dairy foods and cardiovascular disease.

“Milk proteins can reduce blood pressure. Constituents of cheeses reduce the amount of fat we absorb, which, of course, moderates blood lipids responses – including cholesterol,” he said.

Be still my malfunctioning heart! Cheese isn’t bad for you after all. Just wait till I tell the cardiac nurse at home. I am off to seek out the biggest matchbox available.

Of course, the next food story to roll along may well say cheese is bad for your heart, but you don’t have to believe everything you read.

SOME Trump supporters claim God deflected the assassin’s bullet to save their chosen one. This puts a lot on God’s shoulders and reminds us how politics and religion align in the US.

The idea that the Almighty had his all-seeing eye out for Trump seems bizarre. Why would God wish to save such a godless man? I feel I can ask this as a fellow godless man – not in the vilely misbehaving ways of Trump, just as a man without religion.

Anyway, if God put a swerve on that bullet, letting Trump escape with a wound to his right ear, did he therefore sacrifice the rally-goer who was killed? Seems unlikely.

I have it on no authority whatsoever that what God actually said was: “Isn’t there anybody in America other than Trump and Biden who can stand for president? If you like old guys, I’ll throw in Methuselah. He’s 969 – just that bit older than Joe Biden.”

Viewed from these shores, it is tempting to see politics in the US as an aggressive game show that demeans democracy.

Trump exemplifies this with his bellowing insistence that the last US election was stolen from him. He introduced this false idea long before he lost, sowing a bitter seed that grew into the violent attack on the US Capitol building on January 6, 2021.

Having swallowed Trump whole – or having all been swallowed by him – many Republicans now spout his great lie about being cheated at the last election.

Conspiracy theories about the assassination attempt popped up online immediately. Conspiracists sceptical about Trump suggested the shooting had been staged somehow to boost his campaign; conspiracists cleaving to Trump maintained it had been staged by Biden.

Such fevered theories carried no credence but that didn’t stop them being shared widely.

Trumpian Republicans are still trying to blame Biden and the Democrats for the shooting, saying it happened because they’ve been ‘demonising’ Trump for years. The ‘mainstream media’ is blamed too – even though Trump is a creation of the media, having risen on the back of endless publicity, only to turn against the very people who elevated him.

Whenever you hear complaints about the ‘mainstream media’, it’s worth remembering that Trump started that refrain years ago (this doesn’t excuse all media behaviour, but it should sound a klaxon when you hear such complaints).

As for the ‘demonisation’ of Trump, this has mostly consisted of reporting the lies and ridiculous things he has said.

Nigel Farage, the new but already part-time MP for Clacton, uses similar tactics: blaming the media, especially the BBC, when he has endlessly exploited the BBC, and been endlessly promoted by the corporation (see many past moans on this ledge).

Along with the conspiracy theories and the lies, Trump supporters also blame a sinister but non-specific enemy, usually known only as “they” – as in “they” don’t want Trump to win, muttered until the last marble has rolled away.

While not wishing to join sides over the shooting conspiracy theories, there was something striking about Trump’s reaction to being shot. Or there was in the photograph by Associated Press photojournalist Evan Vucci. This shows the former President with his fist raised, blood streaked on his face, amid a huddles scrum of security people.

A perfectly composed image, worthy of a Caravaggio painting; a brilliant photograph indeed, but one that will be forever used to glorify Trump.

As the photograph was taken, Trump shouted: “Fight! Fight! Fight!” Fight who, exactly? Who knows, but the crowds as the Republican National Convention were soon shouting that line, fists raised in a cosplay fascist sort of a way.

Some were also wearing over-sized ear-muff bandages on their right lughole like their wounded hero. Where Nelson put a telescope to his blind eye and declared that he saw no ships, Trump’s supporters cover up their ear and say they will hear no word against him.

Not sure where this will all end. Nowhere good if the Putin-praising pursuer of intolerant politics wins the US election.

How some of the front pages reported Labour’s victory

GRUMPS from left and right started scratching the paintwork on Sir Keir Starmer’s shiny new majority as soon as he parked it in Downing Street. It’s wide but shallow; it touches the sky but has no foundation, they carped.

I’ll tell you what it is.

It’s 412 seats as opposed to 121 for the Conservatives, whom we can now detain in a darkened room for the internecine pursuit of bellowing and biting.

Combined with 72 seats for the Lib-Dems, with a special sitting place reserved for frolicsome leader Sir Ed Davey on a unicycle or in a bumper car or something suitably wacky, that leaves around 500 of the 650 or so seats in this parliament held by politicians on the centre or centre-left.

Talk about getting your country back! We shall return to the usual owners of that phrase in a lowlier paragraph.

Starmer isn’t exciting and thank heavens for that. We’ve had it with Tory prime ministers bursting in one door only to slink out the other. We’ve had it with the rambunctious, wayward vanity of Boris Johnson; the weird glassy-eyed detachment of Liz Truss and her amazing economy-destroying work experience premiership.

Johnson now lectures from the sidelines on how to save the party he helped to destroy; while Truss wrote a book on how to save the west but couldn’t even save her own seat.

Now that was a moment to savour, along with the departure of Jacob Rees-Mogg and others too gloriously numerous to mention.

Rishi Sunak led a disastrous campaign, but at least he accepted defeat with a degree of dignity, something he perhaps should have tried out earlier.

But away with the lot of them.

After 14 years of putting up with Tory neglect of infrastructure and public services, after the unnecessary and continuing pain of austerity, after all the non-productive and nasty noise about immigration, after favours done for mates, after endless culture war spats about nothing, we no longer have to listen.

Tellingly, Starmer’s cabinet contains the most ever ministers educated in comprehensive schools. So no more one-sided lessons from the privileged majority for the rest of us. And that cabinet also contains “the most female ministers in history, including the first ever female chancellor in Rachel Reeves”, as today’s Observer puts it.

Starmer has said he wishes to prioritise “getting stuff done” over tribal politics. A different approach but quietly reassuring after so much tribal shin-kicking and shit-stirring.

Too many speeches of the past 14 years might have been written by the editors of the right-wing press. As for those newspapers, lately they have outdone Cassandra in prophesising doom and dismay, only to see Labour win handsomely.

Whisper it quietly, and hopefully, but perhaps the loudmouths of the right are losing their voice.

One thing Starmer has already got done is the scrapping of Sunak’s immoral and highly costly Rwanda plan to reduce the number of small boat crossings.

What a cruel waste of time, focus and energy that scheme was. And now it’s gone.

Nigel Farage and Reform UK won’t be happy about that, and there’ll be endless noise from that end of the room now that Farage is an MP at his eighth attempt.

The media, and particularly the BBC, has been obsessed with Farage for years. He’s been indulged and courted endlessly by the Beeb and fawned over by the bully boys of the right-wing press, and all that attention has finally put a far-right politician in Parliament.

The BBC should now pay him as much attention as it does the Greens, winners of four seats to Farage’s five. And it should give far more attention to the Lib-Dems, who were massively more successful.

Farage will cause trouble for the Tories and for Labour. That’s what he does. All he knows.

Both parties need a plan on how to muzzle that man, but stepping further right, trying to out-Nigel Nigel, just won’t work.

Incidentally, the never knowingly less than awful Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson complains about the BBC calling Reform UK ‘far right’. Well, that’s what they are – and Farage’s aim has always been to smudge the difference and to make the far right seem acceptable, and to seduce the mainstream right into accepting his vile views.

Anyway, early days and all that. I’m happy to admire Starmer’s paintwork, scratches and all, and give him time to settle in and get on with a job to which he seems surprisingly well suited.

The rows will come, the disappointments with follow. But that’s only to be expected. For now everything looks brighter than it has for 14 years.

Critics from left and right chunter that Starmer won what was in essence an anti-Tory victory.

Well, good luck to him: someone had to boot that lot out.

As the general election campaign grinds on, here are some moments.

First up, The Guardian. In a report from Hull, Daniel Boffey spoke to Labour’s Karl Turner, first voted in as the MP for Hull East in 2010 and now standing for re-election…

“We met a guy who said he was going to vote Labour but wouldn’t now because he had just heard that we were taxing condoms. I said, ‘condoms?’ ‘Yeah,’ he said: ‘I just heard on that [pointing to the TV] that you are taxing condoms, and I’m not having it. You’re not getting my vote’.”

After scratching his head, Turner explained: “We’re taxing non-doms, not condoms.” The voter replied: “Like the prime minister’s wife? Ah,” and called out: “Margaret: they’re taxing non-doms, not condoms.”

For all the squabbling TV debates, all the noisy arguments, all the high-flown this and high-flown that, all the endlessly misleading headlines, people cast their vote for the oddest reasons.

Onto even stranger things, in The Spectator – “The mysterious sex appeal of Nigel Farage” by Ann Widdecombe. In this column, the former Tory MP turned Reform loon examines how Farage has an alure for women.

Sadly, no more would I read such a story than one headlined: “The mysterious sex appeal of Ann Widdecombe” by Nigel Farage.

Let’s leave Farage and Widdecombe to their own devices and desires in a darkened corner of the bar, just beyond the people telling racist jokes. But don’t be beastly to Farage, or Ann might come after you, swinging her tiny intolerant fists.

Many of these stories, these snatches of events, these muttered half-conversations, are to be found on X/Twitter.

Should you possess bottomless stamina, seek out Ricard Tice. He’s the interminably dull former leader of Reform. The man pushed out of the way once Farage spotted an opportunity to insert himself into the headlines again.

One such recent posting by Tice simply said: “Remarkable…” above a graph suggesting that Reform UK have “the highest number of social media page interactions (May 22 to June 17)”.

This isn’t as remarkable as Mr Tice supposes, but does illustrate something that has long worried me. The more you engage with your ‘enemies’ on social media, the stronger they become, thanks to the way algorithms work.

Having “the highest number of social media page interactions” doesn’t mean people are supporting you. But it does mean they are talking about you.

Whether they love what you propose or think you’re merely the latest appalling iteration of British fascism, all comments and engagements notch up a ‘hit’.

After writing too many hostile comments on such unpleasant posts, I have disengaged. Being snide about our unloveliest people gets you nowhere and is bad for your mental calm.

Also bad for the equilibrium is listening to all the stupid things Rishi Sunak has said and done.

A recent posting had the words: “I will never stop fighting for this country” above a picture of a family, including a child, seemingly being lined up before a firing squad, beneath the words: “Don’t surrender your family’s future to Labour”.

Every Tory low in this campaign is followed by another, like a grotesque game of limbo… you think we can’t go that low, just hold my beer (or water, in Sunak’s case).

Thanks at this time are due to to Richard Osman, the TV presenter turned disgustingly successful writer of crime fiction (the sour grapes aisle is down there, just past that tottering stack of his best-sellers).

Many Tories have been banging on about the prospect of a huge majority for Labour, calling it a “super-majority”.

On X/Twitter, Osman sensibly pointed out: “A gentle reminder that the phrase ‘super-majority’ is meaningless in U.K. politics. There is nothing you can do with a 350-seat majority that you can’t do with an 80-seat majority.”

His view is backed up by the Electoral Reform Society, which explains on its website: “The phrase ‘super-majority’ is commonly used in the USA to describe what is technically called a qualified majority. Qualified majority provisions are used to entrench important pieces of legislation by setting a higher bar than a simple majority to pass legislation. Commonly, this level might be 2/3rds…”

In other words, it has nothing to do with having a whopping majority – something Tories seem keen enough on when they have one.

As for those endless TV debates, mostly they are to be avoided by sensible people. I’ve watched excerpts through my fingers. Life is too short. Or too long. Or too full of other possibilities.

From what I have seen, Sunak was tetchy and screamingly untruthful, chuntering “tax, tax and more tax”. While Sir Keir Starmer looked like he’d rather vomit than answer a question.

Now I quite like Starmer, and dearly hope all the projections of Tory doom and destruction come good. But being more inspirational wouldn’t hurt the Labour leader.

An on-screen quote from CNN on the presidential debate

Still, at least we’re not in the US, where the first presidential debate resembled a scrap in an old people’s home. Are these two really the only possible candidates in a country of 330 million? A doddering Democrat who looks like he needs to find a comfortable chair. And a marginally less doddery Republican famed for being hugely untrustworthy.

CNN factchecked Trump live on air and nearly every word was a lie.

But in a world where condoms and non-doms can be confused, no one is paying attention.

If you wanted a really stupid way to run a country, you’d return the same party to power again and again, never mind how effective they are.

And if that trusty arrangement began to wobble, you’d make sure to complain about how the legs have suddenly become uneven.

Members of that usually incumbent party would whine bitterly about a ‘one-party state’.  While forgetting that they are perfectly happy when they’re the singular party in question.

And if you were a member of an opportunistic gate-crashing party – a racist, xenophobic, shit-stirring outfit, for example – your devotees might suddenly notice the unfairness of first-past-the-post voting. Seemingly unaware that left-wing people have been moaning on about that for years.

And if you were a disgruntled member of the party that always wins, or a dim disciple of the shit-stirring messiah, you’d take to social media to bitch on and on about your seemingly unassailable opponent.

The client newspapers and their obedient columnists would start to work overtime ­– almost certainly for the first time in their cossetted lives – to bash out unhinged columns on the theme of what is about to happen. A handy shorthand to encapsulate these rants would be ‘it’s not fair’, with a side order of ‘we’re all doomed, doomed, I say’.

Should you be the sort of fool who kicks around the fetid alleyways of X/Twitter – or Ex-Twitter, as it’s not what it was – you may well have noticed a preponderance of moaning from ‘the other side’.

In case you don’t know, X/Twitter works by having two feeds, ‘For You’ and ‘Following’. The first is a general news feed, while the second supposedly contains people you follow, or those who follow you.

Since Elon Musk took over, the For You feed should really be renamed ‘For You If You’re A Frothing Right-Wing Nutjob’. Dear Lord, the endless sour quibbles and bitter ranting served up on there by Musk’s algorithms is quite something. And that’s the ‘healthy’ end of the scale: the other end doesn’t bear mentioning.

You might well wonder why a sensible person would look at that feed. And you’d be right. The only defence is, have you seen the arrant, twisted, arse-over-tit nonsense these people spout.

It’s also a way of seeing how ‘the other side’ think – if indeed thinking is what they do.

As you can see from the top of this blog, the Daily Usual Suspect has been clutching its pearls and then scattering them about the room in a fit of vapours.

Apparently we’re heading for a ‘one-party socialist state’ – that’s if the opinion polls consistently giving Labour a clear lead are to be believed.

To which you can only reply, have you seen Sir Keir Starmer, as he doesn’t seem that much of a socialist.

The Daily Usual Suspect’s Famously Rubbish Columnist has got in on this act, too.

Boris Johnson tweeted about his never knowingly readable column: ‘If Labour wins big, the Commons will be crammed with Palestinian-flag waving Corbynistas ­– and it won’t just be the rich getting soaked, it’ll be everyone. Voting Tory is the ONLY way to stop Starmergeddon.’

You can just see him sniggering over that immature neologism. A 60-year-old former prime minister reduced to sixth-form sniping. Then again, he’s been doing that his whole life.

And if there is a massive Labour victory, Johnson will have helped bring that about. He secured an 80-seat majority in 2019 ­– an impressive achievement demolished with the swinging balls of his own self-destructive boorishness (this sixth-form sniping can be quite addictive).

So, yes, if you wanted a really stupid way to run a country, you’d return the same party to power again and again.

It would be good if we could avoid that this time. Give the other side a chance. Maybe they’ll do a better job. Maybe we’ll hardly notice the difference.

But all this talk of a ‘one-party socialist state’ is just the self-serving blather of people who think only they should run things.

I have some doubts about Starmer but will happily park those in the hope that he wins. The present lot really don’t deserve another day in power.