вход по аккаунту


The Guardian e-paper Journal - April 16, 2018

код для вставкиСкачать
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:1 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 18:04
Only diplomacy can end Syria’s agony Jeremy Corbyn, page 4
Why it’s hard to tell the scale of data harvesting on Facebook Open Door, page 4
Enoch Powell’s hateful tricks are still with us Matthew d’Ancona, page 5
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
and ideas
Forcing schools
to abandon
inclusion leaves
us all poorer
uman progress is slow to happen
and sometimes hard to see: in an era
as troubled as ours, the world can
easily look as though it is regressing
at speed. But look back, and you
may see how far we have come.
I grew up in a world where grim
words such as “handicapped” and
“retarded” were part of everyday speech, and disabled
people were too often shut away. A sure sign of the
way society kept some people at arm’s length was the
inhuman use of the definite article: people knew about
“the deaf”, “the blind” and “the disabled”, but didn’t
give them much thought.
Many of these attitudes linger. But millions of people
now know that even the word “disability” often does
little justice to who people actually are, and how much
the concept blurs into the supposedly “able” population.
On a good day, it can feel like a set of old prejudices may
at last be being laid to rest. Human beings are complex:
as the American writer Steve Silberman puts it in his
book NeuroTribes, “Just because a computer is not
running Windows doesn’t mean it’s broken. Not all the
features of atypical human operating systems are bugs.”
And then you look at the English education system
and wonder what happened. Cuts are deepening, and
there is a rising sense of children who do not fit in being
pushed out lest they threaten the gods of discipline,
rote learning and competitive exam performance.
At the last count, 4,152 children deemed to have
special needs had not been found a school place (up
from 776 in 2010), and most of them were forced to stay
at home without any formal provision. Even if they are
in school, thousands more are increasingly being denied
the support they need.
The ideal of inclusion is based on the simple principle
that schools should reflect the world at large, so that
education in the dry stuff of spelling and sums is
accompanied by schooling kids in the meaning of
diversity. Hearing people’s stories, you rather get the
sense that this ideal is slowly being superseded by a
mixture of chaos and the gradual return of segregation.
As things stand, the government funds the majority
of pre-16 state education through the dedicated schools
grant, one of whose elements is the so-called high needs
block, meant to cover the education of children who
either need intensive support in mainstream education,
or go to special schools. From 2011 up to
now, the high needs block has effectively
been frozen – and to make things worse,
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:2 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 18:43
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
Forcing schools to abandon
inclusion leaves us all poorer
John Harris
Continued from front
new government rules now limit councils’
ability to top up special–needs funding.
Amid an across-the-board spending
squeeze, dozens of local authorities are running high
needs deficits. Across England as a whole, there is
reckoned to be a £400m gap between what councils say
they require for their high needs provision and what
the government is providing. So schools are cutting
back on teaching assistants, special needs training and
outside help. If you have a child with special needs, or
know anyone who does, you will know what all this
entails. One-to-one provision at school often makes the
difference between a child progressing or withdrawing.
Without such support, it can feel like the sky is falling in.
At the same time, sweeping reforms to the special
needs system – which, among other things, extend the
state’s responsibilities to thousands of people up to the
age of 25 – have been botched and underfunded. There
are real concerns about academies either excluding kids
with special needs or pushing parents to choose other
schools. In an absurd twist, people are now exiting the
public-sector system and successfully pushing councils
to fund places at independent special schools.
In the London borough of Hackney, where a brilliant
group of parents is fighting cuts to special needs
provision and organising a legal challenge under the
banner of Hackney Special Education Crisis, this latter
cost now accounts for around half of a nearly £6m high
needs overspend. It also threatens to create a vicious
circle: more children leaving mainstream schools as
their special needs provision gets cut, rising bills for
special school places, even more cuts as a result.
Meanwhile, many lives are getting more difficult.
I spoke this week to the mother of a 10-year-old boy
who was diagnosed with autism and attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) when he was five. After
three unsuccessful attempts, he now has a formal
education, health and care plan that in theory makes his
provision dependable and accountable. But the support
at his inner London school has been diluted, and she
now worries about him being bullied. Another mother
told me about her 10-year-old son, recently excluded
from school for two days, and promised provision that
has yet to materialise. “I have a document, and I go to
meetings, but I don’t see any results,” she said.
It would be easy to think that this is all about
austerity, but it is worse than that. In the Conservatives’
2010 manifesto, there was a pledge to “end the bias
towards the inclusion of children with special needs
in mainstream schools”, and push back against “the
ideologically driven closure of special schools”. In the
context of education policy, these pledges have since
taken on a more sinister aspect.
We all know what modern English education
policy is all about: results, league tables, a fixation
with “discipline”. The stupid Tory obsession with
grammar schools is of a piece with that. Where, you
wonder, does special needs education fit in. The
beginnings of an answer, perhaps, lie in a government
announcement in 2017 that under the auspices of the
free schools programme, there are to be 19 new “special
free schools”, providing “high quality provision
for children with special educational needs and
disabilities”, to add to around 30 free schools that have
already opened. Some councils’ policies are seemingly
starting to reflect similar logic. If this causes anyone
disquiet, they should get in touch with a pressure group
called Allfie – the Alliance for Inclusive Education.
“What we’re fighting against is segregated education,”
one of their staff members told me this week. “We’re
talking about an ideological drive.”
I have a child with special educational needs. He’s 11 –
and, with a lot of support, he has been taught alongside
his peers in mainstream state schools since he was four.
He has benefited immeasurably: quite apart from how
much he likes such subjects as music, science and IT,
he has started to acquire some of the everyday social
skills he finds difficult. But that is only half the point.
His presence at his endlessly encouraging, proudly
diverse school means that his peers understand what
human difference means in practice. This is the ideal we
are now going to have to fight for – before it gets snuffed
out, with tragic consequences.
Founded 1821 Independently owned by the Scott Trust № 53,384
‘Comment is free… but facts are sacred’ CP Scott
Syria bombing
MPs should take decisions
that turn upon judgment
rather than known facts
Theresa May’s decision to authorise British military
action over the skies of Syria by royal prerogative rather
than obtaining the backing of parliament was the wrong
thing to do. Even if the prime minister thinks it was
done for the right reasons. It was wrong because the
government’s plans should have been articulated so that
MPs could have had a chance to endorse – or reject – a
motion to bomb Bashar al-Assad’s weapons factories.
It was wrong because there was no emergency – an
exception used when after a debate MPs retrospectively
endorsed action against Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya.
It was wrong because only prime ministers can recall
parliament – and there was time to do so. It was wrong
because decisions about how to police the unlawful
use of weapons of mass destructive terror in Syria turn
upon judgment rather than available facts.
Parliament is the best place to assess whether the use
of military force serves the overall interests of a nation in
such cases. This is especially true of a government without
a majority of its own. Jeremy Corbyn’s resurrection of an
old idea for a war powers act, which would force the PM
not to authorise the active and large-scale deployment
of British forces overseas without the approval of the
House of Commons, ought not to be dismissed. But it
should be accompanied by a wider recognition that the
days of self-regulation of cabinet government are over.
Observing the parliamentary convention would be better
than creating an act where fractious disagreements over
the precise nature of the circumstances in which the
law is to be applied – especially in a situation as fluid and
Quantitative easing
Necessary to stave off
disaster. But not enough to
regenerate a fair economy
When running for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn
wanted a “people’s quantitative easing” to boost the
economy. It was frostily dismissed in 2015 as being
forbidden by provisions in the Lisbon treaty. If we leave
the European Union, those strictures will no longer
apply. This is not to agitate on the side of Brexiters but to
observe that the quiver of the argument against printing
money might lose an arrow or two if we leave the EU.
In fact, the Bank of England, while the UK was in the
EU, did print hundreds of billions of pounds to avoid
economic disaster. At the push of a button, the Bank
conjured up £435bn to buy up gilts – government bonds
– and exchange them for bank deposits. On the national
balance sheet this sum is listed as debt, but it is not in
the strictest sense because it is not owed to anyone.
Turns out there is a magic money tree.
Last week, Andy Haldane, the Bank’s chief economist,
defended the Bank’s low interest rates and quantitative
easing programme from critics, including the prime
minister, who have said the policy rewarded those
who had assets and penalised those who did not.
Mr Haldane’s defence is that the public has yet to grasp
how much worse the crisis would have been without QE.
There’s a bit of truth on both sides. Having sold their gilts
back to the Bank, investors bought up company stocks
and bonds or property – sending prices to record highs
– instead of creating new activity in the real economy,
higher growth and jobs. Money from bond sales
remained stuck in the banking system. The government
could have corralled the private sector to make socially
volatile as war – prevail. This is a politically significant
move by Mrs May. David Cameron became the first
British prime minister to see his war plans foiled by
parliament since 1782 when 30 of his own MPs in 2013
rebelled against the motion to bomb Syria. It was a
humiliating and embarrassing moment but it reflected
the weight of British public and political feeling
against him. After the style of decision-taking on the
road to the Iraq war of 2003, it was commendable that
Mr Cameron sought to do something so unpopular
as a matter of principle. A year later MPs backed his
offensive against Islamic State in Iraq.
Mrs May took military action despite public
sentiment. She has not carried voters or MPs. She ought
to have persuaded the country, if she believed it, that
Britain stood to gain in a punitive action of limited
duration. If her defence was that this was unlikely to
put Britain’s armed forces in harm’s way, she should
have said so. Mrs May should have made parliament
own the argument that western allies were making
sure their red lines were addressed rather than trying
to damage the Assad regime. In not doing so she
makes her government culpable for the conduct of a
murderous dictator. If Mr Assad decides to use nerve
agents or chlorine again to kill and terrify his own
people, the onus will be on Mrs May to react.
The Syrian president will see no threat to his hold
on power and no change on the trajectory of the
Syrian war. Even worse, ordinary Syrians will wonder
why the west acted after 1,900 people were killed
by chemical weapons when 400,000 have lost their
lives to conventional weapons in the grisly civil war.
Syria will continue as a zone of instability as long as
Mr Assad remains in place, with minority Alawite
rule – backed by Baathist-favouring Russia and Shia
Iran – entrenched over Sunni Arab heartlands. This
weekend’s action might prevent Mr Assad’s total
victory, but it will not hasten his defeat. Mrs May
should have been honest about this to both the
public and parliament before dropping bombs.
useful investment but ministers, antagonistic to
the state, sat on their hands. The result was that the
injection of money caused a stock-market boom in
the financial economy, but on the real economy –
the target of the policy – it had little effect.
Government spending, however it is financed,
needs to be the main agent of recovery. In that sense
Conservative ministers are responsible for the costs
of the rescue being dumped on to the blameless
public in the form of falling living standards and
public-service cuts. The lesson from the monetary
side of the equation is that low rates and QE
succeeded in staving off disaster; but was insufficient
to regenerate a buoyant and fair economy. This could
have been achieved by a redistributive, expansionary
fiscal policy which ministers were ideologically
resistant to. Hindsight is the easiest form of virtue.
Mr Corbyn’s proposal became a national
investment bank, financed by government bond
issues, to invest in new job-creating industries. But
Labour could have been more imaginative. Its plans
could have seen the central bank instructed to hand
over funds to a state body so it could buy services and
goods without issuing debt. There are two objections
to this: one is the Bank would have to pay interest on
excess reserves, which would inevitably build up;
or let its target rate fall to zero. Both occur today and
are managed. The second is hyperinflation. Yet all
spending – government or private – carries an inflation
risk. A future chancellor could commit to using fiscal
policy to make sure nominal spending keeps pace
with the real capacity of the economy to produce
goods and services – and withdraw the stimulus if
annualised GDP growth exceeded, say, 2.5%. These are
dream figures: UK growth is expected to be 1.5% this
year. It’s predicted that there will be no wage growth
in inflation-adjusted terms for the next two years.
The lack of demand in the economy needs urgent
attention. Enlarging the economy may need bigger
thoughts than politicians have so far entertained.
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:3 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Monday 16 April 2018 The Guardian
Sent at 15/4/2018 18:39
Leaders see
a beautiful
clarity in faraway
war compared
with the fog of
home. Everything
looks easier
May has tied us
to Trump. She
must face the
ission accomplished!” The
presidential tweet was beyond
ominous, reprising as it did
George W Bush’s ill-fated banner
15 years ago. As his Iraq war
dragged on, Bush later admitted
it had “conveyed the wrong
message”. Now Trump’s crass
ignorance of history should serve as a warning he may be
destined, or “locked and loaded”, to repeat it.
Theresa May has tied this country to his fickle whims.
Inside Donald Trump’s circus, war breaks out between
James “Mad Dog” Mattis, the defence secretary who
emerges as the sanest in that shape-shifting entourage,
and Trump’s terrifying new national security adviser,
John Bolton, who reportedly wanted to bomb the hell
out of Iranian forces while they were at it on Friday night.
This is where May’s hand-holding has left us: hitched to
these dangerous men. What a political risk she has taken,
out there alone, against public opinion before and after
the bombing: a Survation poll finds 40% against, 36%
in favour. Even more striking, 54% say she was wrong
not to consult parliament, with only 30% backing her on
Today she finally faces the MPs she dared not consult
– Labour, SNP, Lib Dems and prominent Tories including
Ken Clarke, Dominic Grieve and former soldier Bob
Seely, who loudly expressed their doubts beforehand.
The only reason to avoid parliament was fear of losing a
vote, as David Cameron did in 2013. Some in the cabinet
are reported to have argued to let parliament vote first
– David Davis among them. Will there be a posthumous
vote? The chief whip, Julian Smith, is sounding out his
backbenchers to see if the government would win. There
will be a vote only if he has the numbers. So no vote
today means parliament would certainly have rejected
firing off those missiles.
May will bear all responsibility for whatever comes
next, with support from neither people nor MPs to
protect her. The Russian UN ambassador, Anatoly
Antonov, warns: “Such actions will not be left without
consequences.” Empty threat? We wait to see, fearful of
cyber-attack on the national grid, the NHS or anything
else. GCHQ says it’s on “high alert” to cyber-retaliate
“proportionately”. Some fear Putin will release fake
Theresa May
during a press
conference at
Downing Street
news or genuine kompromat, revealing compromising
stories about British figures: consider the damage done
to Hillary Clinton by releasing her emails.
The two most dangerous words in politics are “Do
something!” Doesn’t matter what, but “something must
be done”. Politicians need to demonstrate effectiveness,
so it takes exceptional honesty to say nothing can
be done, or doing something risks making things
worse. The splurge of righteous indignation filling the
newspapers this weekend declared the undoubted
truth that Assad is a monster gassing his own people.
But there is nothing to be done. He will win this war.
Chemical attacks were effective, as rebels fled Douma.
Will May take in those refugees?
Watching it happen, hand-wringing and helpless, is
the price we pay for disastrous Iraq and Afghanistan
interventions. But what a small price compared with the
Syrians – over 500,000 dead, 5 million fled abroad and
6 million displaced in their own country. Conventional
weapons did this, so going to war over the 75 dead
from chlorine gas looks quixotic – a vaingloriously
pointless gesture. If we had never attacked Iraq, would
we have intervened in Syria early, with gusto? We
seem to have learned that western democracies don’t
have the staying power to defeat distant dictators who
are no direct threat. Do what we can – Kosovo, Sierra
Leone – but it’s futile for Britain to pretend to an ethical,
world-policing foreign policy, while we are supplicants
to Saudi Arabian buying power despite Yemen. Firing
ineffective missiles may boost post-Brexit delusions,
but in truth only makes us look weaker to the world.
he drumbeats of even an unpopular
war stir macho satisfactions: look
at the relish lavished on war-porn
pictures of bunker-busting hardware,
those warships, subs, Tomahawks
and Storm Shadows. How frivolous
to deploy all this with no intent of
altering Syria’s abysmal future, while
causing a perilous confrontation with Russia, old cold
war understandings replaced with the unpredictable
swagger of new, trigger-happy leaders.
Leaders see a beautiful clarity in faraway war
compared with the fog of home. So Trump escapes his
special investigator, Macron his multiple strikes, May
her car-crash Brexit. Give them a “fit for purpose”,
saluting general and a noble cause, and everything looks
easier. Almost always, Britain follows the US, whatever
party here, whatever president there. Brexit makes
us vulnerable, anxious to prove we still have friends.
Trump’s early, anti-Nato bombast reminds us Europe
relies entirely on US defence – and Putin threatens. That
realpolitik is the one good reason for obsequiousness.
But surely the real-world Iraq catastrophe should have
warned us off by now.
Jeremy Corbyn is right – though some say, sourly,
he is just a stopped clock. But his brand of being right
hasn’t helped him: Survation’s poll finds him 20 points
behind May on “Who is best in an international crisis?”
Corbyn, and all of us who oppose this attack, are in
unsavoury company, with Marine Le Pen, ultra-right
Matteo Salvini of Italy’s Lega, and the Morning Star. But
if parliament gets a vote today, Labour anti-Corbynites
should put that aside, remember Iraq, and focus on
the question itself. This was a fruitless, unpopular
and incredibly dangerous gesture that may yet have
“consequences”. Shouldn’t MPs have voted first?
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:4 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 19:11
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
Diplomacy, and
not bombing, is
the way to end
Syria’s agony
hese are serious times. Following
the missile attacks on Syria, now
is the moment for a powerful push
for peace. Boris Johnson’s blithe
acceptance yesterday that the conflict
will now continue on its current course
and that peace negotiations would
be an “extra” is an unconscionable
abdication of responsibility and morality.
Already this devastating conflict has cost more
than 500,000 lives and led to 5 million refugees
being forced to flee Syria, and 6 million internally
displaced. We must put negotiations for a political
settlement centre stage, and not slip into a new cycle
of military reaction and counter-reaction.
Protracted external military intervention in Syria
– from funding and arms supplies to bombing and
boots on the ground – has not helped in the slightest.
Syria has become the theatre for military action by
regional and international powers – the United States,
Britain, Russia, France, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia,
Israel, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates among them.
Saturday’s attack on sites thought to be linked to
Syria’s chemical weapons capability was both wrong
and misconceived. It was either purely symbolic – a
demolition of what appear to be empty buildings,
already shown to be entirely ineffective as a deterrent
– or it was the precursor to wider military action. That
Civil defence workers in Idlib PHOTOGRAPH: AP
would risk a reckless escalation of the war and death toll,
and the danger of direct confrontation between the US
and Russia. Neither possibility offers an end to the war
and suffering, or any prospect of saving lives – rather
the opposite. The intensification of military action will
simply lead to more deaths and more refugees.
There can be no question of turning a blind eye
to the use of chemical weapons. Their deployment
constitutes a crime, and those responsible must be
held to account. The Assad government was supposed
to have given up its chemical munitions stocks (though
not chlorine) under the UN-backed agreement of 2013,
and hundreds of tonnes were destroyed under the
supervision of the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons, Russia and the US.
Contrary to what is claimed, UN security council
agreement was secured then, and again in 2015 and 2016,
for an independent UN chemical weapons inspections
regime. That can and must be re-established, as both
sides in the security council are now proposing.
Inspectors must be given full access to collect
evidence, as well as additional powers. Russia must
be held to its 2013 commitments, and pressure be
exerted on the Assad government to cooperate with
investigations into the outrage at Douma.
The same applies to the armed opposition groups,
some Saudi- or western-backed, which have also been
implicated in the use of chemical weapons. Pressure
can also be applied on those found responsible through
sanctions, embargoes and, if necessary, through the
international criminal court.
Full accountability will depend on an end to the
conflict. But there is plenty that can be done now,
without adding fuel to the Syrian fire. There are those
who are sceptical of multilateral diplomacy. But it is
essential to insist on legality and on a UN sanction for
any further military action. We can’t accept that a “new
cold war” is unavoidable, as the UN secretary general
António Guterres has warned. A shift from the rhetoric
of endless confrontation with Russia could also help
lower the temperature and make a UN consensus for
multilateral action to end Syria’s agony more likely.
The military action at the weekend was legally
questionable. The government’s own justification, which
relies heavily on the strongly contested doctrine of
humanitarian intervention, does not even meet its own
tests. Without UN authority it was again a matter of the
US and British governments arrogating to themselves an
authority to act unilaterally which they do not possess.
The fact that the prime minister ordered the attacks
without seeking authorisation from parliament only
underlines the weakness of a government that was in
reality simply waiting for authorisation from a bellicose
and unstable US president. That’s why we are pressing
for parliament to have the final say on planned military
action in future in a new war powers act.
Further military action would be reckless. Even more
than was the case in the disastrous interventions in Iraq,
Libya and Afghanistan, the continuing war in Syria is
fraught with the danger of a wider conflict, starting with
Russia and dragging in Turkey, Iran, Israel and others.
Nor is there any political plan on offer. Libya offers
the most recent, and calamitous, example of a military
operation launched with no thought to the political
aftermath. Meanwhile the UK-backed Saudi bombing
campaign in Yemen is a humanitarian disaster.
The British government needs to act as a restraining
influence in this crisis, not a camp follower. It is welcome
that the UN security council will now be discussing both
a new weapons inspections regime and a revival of the
peace talks. Such discussions need to be conducted with
the aim of agreement, not big power point-scoring.
We have to remove the scourge of chemical
weapons but also use our influence to end the still
greater scourge of the Syrian war. A diplomatic solution
that will allow for the country to be rebuilt, for refugees
to be able to return home and for an inclusive political
settlement that allows the Syrian people to decide their
own future could not be more urgent.
All this, and not a fresh bombing campaign, is
what the British people want from their government.
Now is the moment for moral and political leadership,
not kneejerk military responses.
Why it’s hard to
tell the scale of
data harvesting
on Facebook
Open door
Paul Chadwick
Paul Chadwick
is the Guardian’s
readers’ editor
tatistics are a staple of journalistic
accuracy issues, but rarely is a number
so big, consequential and hard to
verify as the number of Facebook users
directly affected by the still emerging
Cambridge Analytica story. Is it no more
than 30 million, as Cambridge Analytica
says? Fifty million, as estimated by
the Observer and Guardian journalists who have
done so much to disclose the issue? Or 87 million,
as Facebook has ventured?
The numbers seem to be calculated by multiplying
the number of people known as “seeders” by the
average number of Facebook friends seeders are
thought to have. A seeder was a Facebook user
who installed certain apps that permitted the apps’
controllers to harvest data from the user and the
seeder’s (unknowing) Facebook friends. The wide
variation in the estimates of people affected results
partly from different estimates of seeders – 185,000,
275,000, 300,000 – and different average-number-offriends figures – 160, 180, 250, 340.
Does it matter, in the sense that it is now evident that
many, many other entities – academic, commercial,
governmental – could have harvested the data of users
under previous Facebook policies, for which Mark
Zuckerberg, the company’s ethically callow controller,
apologised before committees of the US Congress last
week, without apparent loss of face?
A sense of perspective was given by the Harvard
professor Jonathan Zittrain, a sophisticated observer
of the social and democratic impacts of digital
technologies: “The Cambridge Analytica dataset
from Facebook is itself but a lake within an ocean,
a clarifying example of a pervasive but invisible
ecosystem where thousands of firms possess billions of
data points across hundreds of millions of people – and
are able to do lots with it under the public radar.”
Incrementally since 2015, journalism organisations
including the Guardian, the Observer, the New York
Times, Politico and the Intercept have shown that a
Cambridge Analytica-related entity paid a company
called Global Science Research (GSR) for the use of
Facebook data that GSR harvested.
Cambridge Analytica, which did work for the
presidential campaigns of Ted Cruz and Donald Trump,
denies that it used “GSR data or any derivatives of this
data in the US presidential election”.
GSR’s co-directors were Aleksandr Kogan and
Joseph Chancellor. GSR, in effect, commercialised
a technique for psychological profiling using big
datasets, on which Kogan and several other Cambridge
University academics worked.
Chancellor joined Facebook as a “quantitative
social psychologist on the user experience research
team”. Is it unreasonable to wonder whether the
potential dataset for the team’s work is 2 billion, the
total number of Facebook users?
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:5 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Monday 16 April 2018 The Guardian
Enoch Powell’s
hateful tricks
are still with us
Sent at 15/4/2018 17:55
was the last person to interview Enoch Powell.
In October 1996, only 16 months before his
death, he was frail and softly spoken, though
still formidably articulate. Our conversation
ranged from John Major’s politics, to St John’s
Gospel, to the poet AE Housman. But what
most exercised him was Europe.
“I have lived into an age in which my
ideas are now part of common intuition,” he said.
“It has been a great experience, having given up so
much, to find that there is now this range of opinion
in all classes, that an agreement with the EEC is
totally incompatible with normal parliamentary
government.” Why was this so? “The nation has
returned to haunt us.” Twenty years later, in the Brexit
referendum, his mystical claim was made all too real.
In a later exchange, Powell insisted that he had never
delivered a speech on “race”, only “immigration”. But
this was a distinction without a difference – as was
made admirably clear in Amol Rajan’s excellent Radio 4
programme on Saturday marking the 50th anniversary of
Powell’s infamous “rivers of blood” speech.
Hearing the text reread in its entirety – broken up into
sections and interspersed with critical analysis – I was
forcefully struck by how bad it was. For all its artful
rhetoric and sonorous phrases, it relied to an appalling
extent upon dubious anecdotage, ludicrous assertions
(white Britons would become “strangers in their own
country”), and – most disgracefully – a leap from an
argument about specific legislative proposals to a totally
unsupported prophecy of bloodshed and immolation.
Yet it is idle to deny the speech’s significance. History,
properly practised, requires a constant readiness to
remember infamy with as much clarity as progress.
To shirk this task is to reduce it to a heritage industry,
a gallery of approved nostalgia. Indeed, it is precisely
when our sense of history falters that populism and
autocracy flourish. As David Andress argues in his recent
book, Cultural Dementia, societies are most vulnerable
to injustice and bigotry when they lose their “anchorage
in the past … Anger, bitterness and horror coexist with
fond illusion and placid self-absorption.”
Powell was wrong about so much. Yet Powellism
found its purest expression in the 2016 EU referendum
result, which enshrined the convergence of two
of his greatest fixations: hostility to immigration
and opposition to Britain’s membership of the EU.
Nigel Farage’s disgusting “breaking point” poster was
the clearest expression of this fusion. But it would be a
mistake to imagine that neo-Powellism is confined to the
dwindling ranks of Ukip.
Since the referendum, we have heard Tory ministers
suggesting that companies should keep lists of foreign
workers, that doctors born overseas were elbowing
aside British teenagers who might otherwise read
medicine, that foreign students should not aspire to
settle here. As Ken Clarke warned in January 2017,
Powell himself “would probably find it amazing to
believe that his party had become Eurosceptic and
rather mildly anti-immigrant in a strange way”.
It is a grave mistake to imagine that hard-right
populism is the preserve of philistines such as Donald
Trump and music-hall acts such as Farage. Powell, the
professor and poet, knew precisely what he was doing,
and the emotions he was stirring. “I deliberately include
at least one startling assertion in every speech,” he said
in April 1968, “in order to attract enough attention to
give me a power base within the Conservative party.”
Dismayed by the retreat of the empire, he believed
a Tory politician could become prime minister by
opposing the European project, demonising immigrants
and posturing as the protector of an embattled nativism.
In this personal endeavour he failed utterly, standing
only once for his party’s leadership (in 1965) and
securing the votes of a mere 15 MPs.
Nor did his Virgilian forecast of “the River Tiber
foaming with much blood” come to pass. Britain is,
has long been, and will endure as a pluralist nation of
multiple identities. But the Powellite toolkit remains
in place, and will be deployed again when those who
voted leave in the hope that net immigration would be
dramatically reduced realise they were misled. How
long before a charismatic young rhetorician of the right
declares that the “spirit of Brexit has been betrayed”?
It has never been more important to recall this
terrible speech, to be reminded of its trickery and its
rhetorical tradecraft, and to grasp how such methods
might be used again. Recollection is the foundation
of vigilance. To confront the ugliness of the past is not
just a right: it is a duty.
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:6 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 17:57
It’s Saturday morning and I am
watching Theresa May on BBC1
with increasing incredulity. We’ll
pass over the fact that there is no
secure evidence that Assad has
used chemical weapons in an area
where Syrian government troops
had already won and no questions
from journalists about what his
motivation could possibly be. Let
us focus instead upon the double
standards displayed by the UK and
the US. The prime minister says the
deaths of civilians in Syria cannot
be tolerated. The US president
states that action must be taken
against mass murderers of men,
women and children, and nations
should be judged by the friends or
global company they keep.
May and Trump are supporters
of Saudi Arabia, assisting its
genocide of the people of Yemen.
They remain silent while Israel
shoots down unarmed civilians and
has deployed white phosphorus in
its previous devastating assaults
upon Gaza. It is clear to me that we
have fostered conflict in Syria for
many years, and that, in general,
western interventions have only
served to destabilise the Middle
East. The cost in human life is huge
and will not be reduced or stopped
by bombing raids from the US and
its allies. Theresa May can strike all
the Churchillian poses she likes, but
this is all about the geopolitics.
Dr Paula James
Chelwood Gate, East Sussex
• We Arabs are sick of being used
for others’ gratification, as yet
another Arab country is turned
into a stage for western actors
to strut and posture for reasons
unconnected with the purported
wellbeing of the Syrian people; so
that Trump can cut a virile figure, or
May can dream of becoming the new
Thatcher – all this at Arab expense
(Editorial, 11 April).
The western position is based
on two dangerous fallacies: that
no proof or independent inquiry is
needed to justify bombing Syria;
and that it’s up to the west, which
helped to fuel Syria’s civil war in
the first place, to do it. Had there
been a shred of concern for Syria’s
people, they would now be left
alone to recover as Syria, no thanks
to western forces, is emptied of its
western-backed jihadis and proxy
mercenaries. The Middle East has
been the playground of the west for
long enough. It’s time to stop.
Dr Ghada Karmi
• I am writing in despair that the
prime minister and President
Macron (whom we previously so
admired) should have joined this
shabby coalition to bomb Syria and
escalate the danger of war, as well
as causing more suffering and grief
to that beleaguered nation. Those
of us who believe in peace, dialogue
and diplomacy – not to mention
international law and the lessons
of the past 100 years – were full of
admiration for President Chirac for
Arab countries are
sick of being used for
others’ gratification,
turned into a stage for
western actors to strut
Ghada Karmi
PEN calls for justice for Maltese
writer Daphne Caruana Galizia
Today marks six months since the
brutal assassination of our colleague
Daphne Caruana Galizia, Malta’s
foremost investigative journalist.
We write to express our profound
concern with the investigation into
her assassination, and regarding the
behaviour of the management of
Valletta 2018, the European Capital
of Culture which is in Malta.
PEN International and our
global community of journalists,
writers and supporters believe that
Daphne Caruana Galizia was killed
in direct response to her fearless
investigative journalism exposing
high-level government corruption
in Malta. Yet the very same Maltese
government officials that she
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
Double standards over
the bombing of Syria
was investigating are in charge of
the ongoing investigation into her
murder. Senior government officials,
including the prime minister,
Joseph Muscat, are insisting on
trying 34 libel cases against her.
Thankfully, the parliamentary
assembly of the Council of Europe
has taken the extraordinary step
of sending a special rapporteur to
scrutinise the investigation. But
more needs to be done.
A further alarming development
has been the repeated and aggressive
destruction of Daphne’s public
memorial in Valletta – a symbolic call
for justice for Daphne. The Maltese
authorities have not attempted to
protect the memorial; in fact Jason
refusing to join the US-UK illegal
invasion of Iraq. We hoped Macron
would stand firm as well, but he has
profoundly disappointed us. So has
our prime minister, who did not
wait for the results of the ongoing
investigation in Damascus, nor for
a vote in parliament, to rush to join
this misguided, pointless and risky
Brigid Keenan
Batcombe, Somerset
• Well done, Mrs May. With a
faltering government, no majority
and Brexit in a shambles she decided
to follow her mentor Mrs T and
ferment a bit of a war a long way
from the UK. Enter the red tops with
the “our brave troops” rhetoric (even
though they did not risk entering
Syrian airspace). Follow this piece
of post-imperial jingoism with a
royal wedding and a royal birth
and she’s cemented the Tories’
position. Parliament? Don’t bother.
Independent investigation results?
Don’t wait. Don’t give it the time of
day. Back to brave little Britain circa
1940 and to hell in a handcart for
people like me who question it all.
Jane Ghosh
• Thank you, Simon Jenkins, for
such a wise and rational article
(Opinion, 13 April). Have we not
learned from countless conflicts
that reprisals and “punishments”
lead only to escalation and not
deterrence? All war is catastrophic,
only to be engaged in at direst
need, when attacked. Britain is
not attacked. All our efforts should
be concentrated on getting the
combatants round a table to discuss
a peaceful settlement, without the
ridiculous condition that Assad must
step down. Whatever his record (and
he is by no means alone in that) he
is the only leader with any kind of
legitimacy, and the only one who
has the power to bring some kind
of order to that ravaged land.
Hazel Davies
Newton-Le-Willows, Merseyside
Micallef, chairman of the Valletta
2018 Foundation, has repeatedly
and publicly attacked and ridiculed
Daphne on social media, ordering the
removal of supportive banners and
the memorial itself. This behaviour
completely demeans the role of
chairman of the capital of culture.
There must be zero tolerance for
the ridiculing of the assassination
of a journalist in the heart of the EU,
especially from the very authorities
entrusted to promote media and
culture. We call for urgent action
to investigate these allegations and
ensure justice for our colleague.
Jennifer Clement President, PEN
International, Margaret Atwood,
Salman Rushdie, Yann Martel,
Eva Bonnier, Albert Bonniers
Förlag, Neil Gaiman, Aslı Erdoğan,
Ian McEwan, Kamila Shamsie,
Andrei Kurkov, Elif Shafak,
Khadija Ismayilova, Paul Muldoon,
Peter Greste
Hurricane-hit islands
need debt relief
This week we will meet with
fellow Commonwealth heads of
government in Windsor. One of
the most pressing challenges
facing smaller Commonwealth
governments is the impact of
climate change, and the rising
debt burden we face as a result.
The 2017 hurricane season was one
of the most devastating in Caribbean
history. In Barbuda and Dominica
destruction totalled more than twice
annual GDP. The growing severity of
hurricanes in the Caribbean is related
to climate change, a major global
threat primarily caused by countries
far richer and larger than our own.
In the wake of increasingly
frequent and devastating disasters,
and in the absence of sufficient
grants to support climate mitigation
and adaption and sustainable
development, small islands have no
choice but to resort to taking on more
debt. Yet many already have large
debts as a result of past disasters and
injustices, loss of trade preferences,
and exclusion from debt relief
schemes, while our small size makes
us more vulnerable to economic
shocks such as global financial crises.
As climate change gets worse,
we urgently need a new system for
fast and effective debt relief when
disasters hit. We should not have
to bear these extra costs ourselves
through climate risk insurance.
We call on larger Commonwealth
countries, including the UK, to play a
leading role in the creation of such a
system. Those who have contributed
the most to climate change are the
real debtors and it is, therefore,
unfair that small island developing
states, which are most vulnerable,
like those in the Caribbean, be
indebted as a result.
We look forward to this meeting
resulting in a bold decision to
address the issues raised above,
in the best interests of all.
Keith Mitchell Prime minister of
Grenada, Gaston Browne Prime
minister of Antigua and Barbuda
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:7 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Monday 16 April 2018 The Guardian
Sent at 15/4/2018 18:01
 @guardianletters
‘David Atkins’
Dead Tree,
at the eighth
Palmer Sculpture
Biennial, on an
eastern scarp of
the Mount Lofty
Ranges, South
Taken on 24
March 2018
Share your
We do not
publish letters
where only an
email address is
supplied; please
include a full
postal address,
a reference to
the article and a
daytime phone
number. We
may edit letters.
Submission and
publication of all
letters is subject
to our terms
and conditions:
A Home Office humanity test
The behaviour of the Home
Office and its agents in ignoring
law and human decency
catalogued by Gary Younge
(Opinion, 13 April) is an example
of the tendency for people’s legal
entitlements to take second place
to administrative convenience.
In the 1970s, there was a scandal
when, after the identification of
a systematic underpayment of
war pensions, someone in the war
pensions branch of the DHSS took
the decision, on administrative
grounds, not to identify, correct
and pay arrears to anyone who had
been underpaid, only adjusting
payment for war pensioners who
raised the matter themselves.
After an inquiry, the department
issued a report entitled “Legal
Entitlements and Administrative
Practices” (LEAP). Unusually,
they distributed it throughout
the department and all managers
(even lowly executive officers like
me) were expected to ensure all
staff were aware of its content.
The gist of the report was that
legal entitlement always trumps
administrative convenience. It also
pointed out that anyone who was
party to an agreement to follow
a procedure that would result in
someone being deprived of their legal
entitlement could be deemed to be
part of a criminal conspiracy. As far as
I know, the LEAP guidance has never
been withdrawn. Amber Rudd, and
Theresa May before her, is evidently
as determined to persist with
procedures which she must know
will prevent many people receiving
their full legal entitlements. Perhaps
someone with better legal credentials
than me – preferably in the Crown
Prosecution Service – should consider
pointing out to them that by so doing
they are putting themselves at the
head of a criminal conspiracy.
Keith Williams
Local US campaigns
boosted living wage
Peter Baker’s long read (13 April) on
the minimum wage and US living
wage misses two important points.
First, during Obama’s presidency,
the US national wage was increased
only twice and this triggered a
wave of living-wage campaigns and
galvanised the campaign for $15 an
hour. This rate was not costed, but
used as a rallying call for campaigns
during 2013-16. By 2017, more than
40 cities and US states had set local
wages, ranging from $8.50 to $16 per
hour. In most cases, the higher wage
was phased in over several years.
Second, regarding debates about
loss of jobs in the US (and UK), we
have to remember that predictions
the national minimum wage would
decimate employment have not
materialised. If anything, the NMW
is arguably more likely to stimulate
demand for jobs by giving the lowpaid more spending power, and has
other positive impacts like lower
turnover and higher productivity.
Peter Prowse
Sheffield Hallam University
• In the real world, a minimum wage
is pointless without a corresponding
maximum income – and the
recognition that, in a civilised society,
we all have to live in a cooperative
culture. It is not the size of our wage
packets that matters: it’s producing
the consumables we want and need.
It is not size of one’s income that
matters; it’s the fact that someone
with more money can buy up
everything before anyone else is
aware there is a sale. The answer is
not equality. The answer is agreeing
the dimensions of inequality.
Martin London
Henllan, Denbighshire
• I am appalled at the racist and
discriminatory behaviour of the
Home Office towards law-abiding
Commonwealth citizens highlighted
by Gary Younge. A similarly brutish
attitude informs the unreasonable
ban on studying for asylum seekers
in the new 201 bail forms. Both
contravene the spirit and the letter
of the Human Rights Act. The system
must be changed. These people are
doing or have done valuable jobs from
which society has benefited. Many of
the asylum seekers who are treated so
badly would make valuable members
of society too, just as the third group,
hardworking EU citizens, are being
made to feel unwelcome.
It is time we genuinely welcomed
people and abandoned the PM’s
“hostile environment” agenda.
I propose that the Home Office
is required to apply a “common
humanity” test before every asylum
claim or immigration case is decided.
The government’s own “Friends and
family” test used for NHS feedback
would make a good starting point.
Edward Milner
Corrections and
• The National Theatre moved to
its new home on the South Bank in
London in 1976, not 1973 as we said
(Olivier organisers offer amends for
Hall error, 11 April, page 16).
• An article (A city that grows good
companies, 11 April, page 10, Journal)
referred to “David Cameron’s old
seat of Whitney”. It’s not right, and
it’s not OK. Cameron’s constituency
was Witney, in Oxfordshire.
Editorial complaints and corrections can be sent to or The readers’ editor,
King’s Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU; alternatively
call 020 3353 4736 from 10am to 1pm Monday to Friday
excluding public holidays. The Guardian’s policy is to correct
significant errors as soon as possible. For more information
on the readers’ editor’s office and the Guardian editorial
code, see Find contacts for other
Guardian departments and staff at
Dress mutton up as
lamb for the best pie
In 1998 Mo Mowlam (My stepmother
Mo helped to achieve peace, 13 April)
was made an honorary freeman
of the City of Sheffield, not only in
recognition of who she was and of
her political career, but particularly
for her role in helping to secure
peace in Northern Ireland. Doing
the same for Tony Blair wasn’t
even considered.
Dr Sylvia Dunkley
• I was moved to tears reading the
article about Mo Mowlam. Where
are the politicians today with her
kindness, empathy and honesty?
The PM and home secretary are
traitors to our sex, especially in
the way they are treating black
people who have lived and worked
here all their lives. There are many
wonderful women in the Labour
party. Vote them in.
Marilyn Turner
Market Harborough, Leicestershire
• The poster for The South Bank
Centre’s 1992 exhibition Ready
Steady Go featured a painting by
Gillian Ayres (Obituary, 13 April). The
copy on my office wall prompted
the same clever-clogs philistine
question “What’s that?” so often that
I was well practiced at answering
“It’s called ‘Lure’ and it’s worked.”
Nik Wood
• I support Felicity Cloake’s beef
over beef, but the perfect shepherd’s
pie (Feast, 14 April) is made with
mutton not lamb.
Geoff Wicks
• What better use of empty space
on the crossword page (Letters, 13
April) than a regular bridge column,
as there are 300,000 regular players
of bridge in the UK.
John Frisby
Established 1906
Country diary
Beauly, Invernessshire and Uganda
One of the first summer migrants
to grace the Highland moors
is the wheatear, a dressy little
insectivorous “chat” so often seen
at the roadside, and instantly
identified by its white arse as it flits
delicately to the next perch, never
very far away. Just how “white
arse” evolved into “wheat ear” over
the centuries is a mystery to me.
It has nothing to do with wheat or
ears and everything to do with its
flashy white rump.
I was in northern Uganda on the
South Sudan border in February,
where wintering wheatears were
abundant, already in breeding
plumage, looking exactly the same
as they do when they arrive here:
the males dapper in black and
silver-grey, rose pink at the throat,
and that giveaway bob of Persil
white – altogether unmistakable.
Their endearing habit of perching
atop a boulder, almost always
confidingly close, makes Oenanthe
oenanthe easy to spot and quick to
identify. My wife and I felt a twinge
of home and a premature gleam of
the Highland spring as we fought
off flocks of absurdly gaudy redbreasted bee-eaters, dazzlingly
iridescent scarlet-chested sunbirds,
and the constantly bickering village
weavers (Ploceus cucullatus) in
bright ochre and black masks. Their
intricately woven nests dangled
like Christmas tree baubles from
the branches of the ebuli figs (Ficus
ovata) that surrounded our camp.
Strangely, among all that superabundance of fabulous birdlife
– Uganda boasts more than a
thousand species – the wheatears
held their own. Driving through
semi-arid savannah and sere
grasslands, we often stopped to
admire their familiar pert stances
on rocks and their short, flickering
flights to the next nearby vantage
point, exactly as they do here in our
glen. We wondered how they would
fare on the 4,000-mile migration
across the Sahel and the Med, up
through Spain and France to the
windswept moors of home, theirs
and ours, where they will breed.
We got there in a matter of hours, of
course, but it wasn’t long before they
made it too. I saw my first welcome
white arse in March, but none since.
The late snow and frost has held
many summer migrants back.
John Lister-Kaye
Twitter: @gdncountrydiary
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:8 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 18:09
Miloš Forman
Oscar-winning director
of One Flew Over the
Cuckoo’s Nest and Amadeus
hen Miloš
who has
aged 86,
to Prague
to shoot
the film Amadeus in 1984, it was
the first time he had set foot in his
homeland for 16 years. He had fled
communist Czechoslovakia in 1968
just before the Russians put an end
to the Prague Spring.
In the US, when he was offered
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
(1975), set in a state psychiatric
hospital, he saw it as a metaphor
for the conformist society from
which he had escaped. Forman
identified with McMurphy (Jack
Nicholson), the grinning antihero
fighting the system as represented
by Nurse Ratched, played with
chilling authority by Louise
Fletcher. McMurphy is finally
lobotomised after attempting to
throttle the nurse, who signified
the way totalitarian regimes exact
revenge on transgressors. It was
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
something Forman knew about
personally, having lived under
nazism and Stalinism.
The picture, made at a cost of
$3m, earned more than $50m. It
was also the first movie since It
Happened One Night (1934) to win
all five top Oscars: best picture,
best actor (Nicholson), best actress
(Fletcher), best director and best
screenplay adaptation. It was
an especially sweet triumph for
Forman, who had been struggling to
get work when One Flew Over the
Cuckoo’s Nest came along.
Born in Čáslav, near Prague,
Forman was eight when his father,
Rudolf Forman, a professor, and
mother, Anna Švábová, a hotelier,
died in Nazi concentration camps.
He was brought up by two uncles
and friends of his parents, and it was
much later that he discovered that
his biological father was a Jewish
architect, Otto Kohn.
In 1950, aged 18, he enrolled in
the newly founded Prague film
school, Famu, and began directing
documentaries for Czech television
four years later. In 1963, Forman
Main image: One
Flew Over the
Cuckoo’s Nest
(1975), with Jack
Nicholson third
from right; and,
right, Forman
in 1999
made two short films, one on a
talent contest, and the other on a
band competition, which revealed
his keen eye for the minutiae of
human behaviour and a taste for
gently mocking simple pleasures.
After these shorts, in which he gave
documentary material fictional
form, his first feature, Peter and
Pavla (AKA Black Peter, 1964), gave
his fictional material documentary
form. By using mostly non-actors,
improvised dialogue and filming in
the streets, Forman brought a new
vitality into Czech cinema.
As sharply observed and
satirically affectionate was A Blonde
in Love (AKA Loves of a Blonde,
1965). It told of a shy romantic
factory girl in a small town depleted
of men, who falls in love with a
visiting young pianist.
Forman’s films, and others of the
Czech new wave, introduced to the
cinema portrayals of working-class
life untainted by the formulae of
socialist realism. Though fiercely
attacked by Stalinist reviewers
initially, the more liberal faction
of the Communist party, then in
ascendancy, appropriated these
movies as expressions of the new
concept of “socialist” art.
most was
the notion
freedom of
the right to
People were more wickedly
satirised by Forman in The Firemen’s
Ball (1967). A beauty contest fizzles
out when the contestants refuse
to leave the cloakrooms, the raffle
prizes are stolen, someone has
a heart attack and a house burns
down. The film, which took some
sideswipes at petty bureaucracy,
brought the director into disfavour
with the authorities and caused
40,000 Czech firemen to resign in
protest until it was explained that
the picture was merely allegorical.
Following the Soviet invasion of
1968, The Firemen’s Ball was listed
as one of four Czech films to be
banned “forever”. It was the last
Forman made there before he left
for the US.
Taking Off (1971), in which he
cast his sardonic eye on American
middle-class families, failed
commercially. In 1972, he directed
The Little Black Book, a play by his
friend Jean-Claude Carrière, on
Broadway. It ran for seven nights.
Then the US immigration service,
acting on a complaint from the
Directors Guild of America, nearly
prevented him from working.
Fortunately, Sidney Lumet, Paddy
Chayefsky, Mike Nichols and Buck
Henry successfully pleaded his case.
With this threat of expulsion
hanging over him, Forman was
approached by the producers Saul
Zaentz and Michael Douglas to
direct One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s
Nest. “Of course I said yes,” Forman
said. “I loved the novel [Ken Kesey’s
counterculture classic] from the
start and thought it would make
a wonderful movie.”
Skilfully shifting from gentle
comedy to farce to tragedy, the film
perfectly demonstrated Forman’s
special talent in dealing with
conflicts between different sets
of people, each of whom is well
intentioned but who clash because
their ideas and methods are at odds.
After making this hymn to
nonconformity, Forman seemed a
logical choice to direct Hair (1979),
the film version of the hit 1967 stage
musical. But the age of Aquarius
seemed long over, and its flower
power paraphernalia had withered
and died.
Much of Forman’s special talent
was submerged when tackling “big”
subjects in Ragtime (1981), an
impressive but not altogether
coherent survey of America at the
beginning of the 20th century, based
on the EL Doctorow bestseller. The
film was a box-office failure.
Forman bounced back with
Amadeus. Having seen Peter
Shaffer’s 1979 play about the rivalry
between Mozart, a musical genius
but childish buffoon, and Antonio
Salieri, the far less talented court
composer, at its first London
premiere, Forman informed the
playwright, through their mutual
agent, that he wanted to film it.
While sticking very close to
the original, the film became a
sumptuous spectacle powered
by Mozart’s music. It also had an
uninhibited, giggling performance
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:9 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Monday 16 April 2018 The Guardian
Sent at 15/4/2018 18:09
 @guardianobits
from Tom Hulce in the title role, and
F Murray Abraham as the dignified
but malevolent Salieri. Amadeus
even bettered Forman’s earlier
Oscar haul by winning best picture,
best actor (Abraham), best director,
best screenplay adaptation, best art
direction, best sound, best costume
and best makeup.
Remaining in the 18th century,
Forman embarked on a screen
adaptation of Les Liaisons
Dangereuses, only to discover that
Stephen Frears was doing the same
thing. “We were in the middle of our
script already when they announced
their version, based on the play,”
Forman recalled. “Of course we
immediately learned they were
rushing into it very fast. With the
concept I had, we all knew I couldn’t
be faster. We couldn’t beat them.
So, I was expecting a call from the
producers saying, ‘Sorry, Miloš, we
can’t take the risk.’ The call came.
They asked me, ‘Does it really bother
you that another film is going to be
made?’ I said of course not. And I felt
like, God, Hollywood is still crazy.
That’s good.”
Although, at the time, Forman’s
Valmont (1989) suffered from
unfavourable comparisons with
Frears’s Dangerous Liaisons (1988),
his film (less faithful to Choderlos
de Laclos’s epistolatory novel), with
a much younger, less known cast,
was more interested in the seduction
itself than the art of seduction, and
is the more heartfelt.
Forman’s The People vs Larry
Flynt (1996) sits with One Flew Over
the Cuckoo’s Nest, Amadeus and
the later Man on the Moon (1999) in
being about inspired misfits. This
told of America’s most notorious and
successful pornographer who ran a
series of strip clubs and the raunchy
Hustler magazine. What concerned
Forman most was the notion that
freedom of speech encompasses
the right to offend and must apply
to unpopular beliefs. Man on the
Moon was about the comedian Andy
Kaufman (played by Jim Carrey),
who was first lauded and then
dumped by the TV networks.
It was seven years before Forman
directed another feature, during
which time he carried out his duties
as professor of film at Columbia
University, New York, and tried to
get various projects off the ground.
Goya’s Ghosts (2006), about
the Spanish inquisition, had some
topical parallels with religious
intolerance, fanaticism, torture,
occupation and war, with the cast
speaking English in a range of
different accents.
Forman, who became an
American citizen in 1975, was twice
divorced. He is survived by his third
wife, Martina Zbořilová, whom
he married in 1999, and their twin
sons, James and Andrew, and by
twin sons, Petr and Matej, from his
second marriage, to Věra Kŕesadlová.
Ronald Bergan
Miloš Forman (Jan Tomáš Forman),
film director, born 18 February 1932;
died 13 April 2018
Lady Turner of Camden
Trade unionist and
Labour politician who
fought for women’s rights
n her maiden speech in
the House of Lords, the
former trade union leader
Muriel Turner, Lady Turner
of Camden, who has died
aged 90, chose to speak
on what was, for her, the
highly appropriate subject
of social welfare. It was the issue to
which most of her professional life
had been dedicated and she spoke
with eloquence and compassion
of how the prime motivation of
the trade union movement had
been to remove the deprivation,
degradation and misery that had
been the lot of many working people
throughout history.
She could have added that it was
a circumstance that still pertained
in the years of her own childhood,
growing up between the wars
in a working-class household in
Bromley, south-east London,
a bright girl who longed for the
university education her family were
too poor even to consider.
The sense of having herself been
trapped by poverty provided her
with a determination that became
the mainspring of her career. She left
school aged 16, initially to work in
an insurance company, but anxious
to avoid a lifetime in the traditional
female employment market,
she became a clerk in the ASSET
trade union, which represented
supervisors and technicians in the
engineering industry.
Thereafter, she eagerly signed up
for training courses offered by the
union, including those at Ruskin
College, Oxford, and became a
specialist in the union’s industrial
injury work. She won increasing
regard for her negotiating skills and
authority in representing union
members in disputed industrial
cases, despite her lack of formal
qualifications; she always credited
the labour movement for having
provided her with the chance to
extend her education.
She was appointed personal
assistant to the general secretary
and, in 1961, when Clive Jenkins
arrived to run the union, became
national officer and then assistant
general secretary. On the merger that
led to the formation of the whitecollar union ASTMS (Association of
Scientific, Technical and Managerial
Staffs), she remained as Jenkins’s
deputy – which was an unusual post
for a woman at that time. There
were 65,000 members in 1970 when
she took up the post and more than
500,000 when she retired from the
office in 1987.
Turner was good at her job. She
was knowledgable and persuasive
on the benefits of trade union
membership for bank staff and other
institutional office workers and it
was part of her lifelong mission to
combat inequality and to give a voice
to the powerless, particularly poorly
paid women struggling with social
disadvantage. It was a commitment
she later took to the Lords.
She had a sharp brain and,
normally, a courteous manner,
but she could be merciless when
confronted by hypocrisy. She was
against what she termed “gesture
politics” and said that “marvellous
slogans” were never any good on
their own.
The elder of two daughters,
Muriel was strongly influenced by
her father, Edward Price, a machine
fitter and an active trade unionist,
Muriel Turner
was a casualty
of the ‘cash
for questions’
scandal and
resigned from
in 1996
whose family came originally from
Builth Wells, Powys. She was not
close to her mother, a convert to
Roman Catholicism whose faith
Muriel rejected as a teenager. She
later became a member of the
National Secular Society and in
the Lords campaigned against
discrimination in faith schools and
the imposition of collective worship,
both of which she regarded as
antipathetic to equality.
By the same token she was an
outspoken advocate of gay and
lesbian rights, especially with
regard to employment, and she
sponsored a bill in 1996 to outlaw
such discrimination at work. She
had supported Stonewall since
its foundation in 1989 and was
recognised by members of the
organisation as having been a
pioneer on equality issues that are
now taken for granted.
A member of the Communist
party until the invasion of Hungary
in 1956, she had moved to the left
of the Labour party by the time
she joined the Lords in 1985. The
following year she was appointed to
the opposition frontbench to speak
on social welfare and pensions and
in 1987 added the employment
portfolio to her responsibilities.
This highly successful second
career ended in ignominy, however,
in 1996.
She had become a director of a
company run by the Conservative
political lobbyist Ian Greer five years
earlier. This was a choice that itself
exhibited an uncharacteristic lack of
judgment for a Labour spokeswoman,
and when Greer’s activities in the
“cash for questions” scandal were
exposed in the Guardian, Turner
became an unwitting casualty. She
was obliged to resign from the
frontbench and was consequently
denied the chance of ministerial
office she would certainly otherwise
have enjoyed when Tony Blair was
elected PM the following year.
Turner was a member of the TUC
General Council (1981–87) and a
member of the Equal Opportunities
Commission (1982–88). She was
a member of the Occupational
Pensions Board (1977–93) and of the
Occupational Pensions Advisory
Service (1989–2007). She chaired
the Personal Investment Authority
Ombudsman Council from 1994
until 1997 and was deputy speaker
of the House of Lords from 2002
until 2008. One of her proudest
achievements was the award of an
honorary doctorate of laws by the
University of Leicester in 1991.
After a short early marriage ended
in divorce, in 1955 she married
Reginald Turner, a wartime wing
commander who became an artist.
He died in 1995. She is survived by
her two stepchildren, Richard and
Gay, and two granddaughters, Ailsa
and Lindsey.
Julia Langdon
Muriel Winifred Turner, Lady Turner
of Camden, trade unionist and
politician, born 18 September 1927;
died 26 February 2018
Lady (Joan) Bakewell, writer and
broadcaster, 85; Ellen Barkin,
actor, 64; Max Beesley, actor and
musician, 47; Benedict XVI, pope
emeritus, 91; Rafael Benítez,
football manager, 58; Nick Berry,
actor, 55; Sue Clifford, founder
director, Common Ground, 74;
Lynne Franks, publicist, 70; Vince
Hill, singer, 84; Aaron Lennon,
footballer, 31; Freddie Ljungberg,
footballer, 41; Lily Loveless,
actor, 28; Prof Margaret Maden,
educationist, 78; Ruth Madoc,
actor, 75; Salim Malik, cricketer, 55;
Conchita Martínez, tennis player,
46; Jimmy Osmond, singer, 55;
Sir Geoffrey Owen, former editor,
Financial Times, 84; Paula Sherriff,
Labour MP, shadow minister for
mental health and social care, 43;
Alek Wek, model, 41.
Stéphane Audran
Derek Granger writes: As the
producer of Granada television’s
version of Brideshead Revisited, I
cast the net wide in our search for
the actress to play Cara, mistress of
the exiled Lord Marchmain. How
lucky we were in Stéphane Audran
(obituary, 2 April). No one could
have fitted more perfectly Evelyn
Waugh’s conception of the “neat
prosaic figure” who marshalled her
two undergraduate charges, Charles
Ryder and Sebastian Flyte, as she
guided them on their tour of Venice.
Audran was an actress of great
subtlety. In the scene in which she
gently confronted Charles with
the truth about his relationship
with Sebastian, her expressiveness
provided a masterclass in intimate
scene playing.
Away from the set, Audran was
an engaging colleague who offered
a sometimes surprising twist to the
workaday travails of a long location
shoot. “Derek, who do you think
I met today walking across the
Yorkshire dales?” There was a
second’s pause: “It was my skiing
instructor.” What followed was
a charming request for Granada
to add another supernumerary
to the hotel budget. The word
which most readily conveyed her
quality is appropriately a French
one: insouciance.
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:10 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 17:11
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
Sonny Akpan, left, playing with the
Funkees, a band from Aba, Nigeria,
that relocated to London in 1973
Sonny Akpan
Conga player with the Funkees and
Eddy Grant before setting up a drum
manufacturers in east London
My friend Sonny Akpan, who has
died aged 69 after a long period of
illness, was a highly regarded conga
player who played in chart-topping
acts internationally, including the
Funkees and Eddy Grant’s band,
plus the psychedelic dub ensemble
African Head Charge. He also
played for the Rolling Stones, Fela
Kuti, Lester Bowie, Osibisa, Phil
Manzanera and Julio Iglesias in a
career spanning five decades.
Born into a farming family in
Akwa Ibom state, Nigeria, Sonny
learned traditional drumming from
his elders, earning his stripes in the
highlife band Dan Satch’s Atomic 8.
Sonny’s first real success came
with the Funkees, founded in 1970
during the final days of Nigeria’s
civil war. Based in Aba, the Funkees
honed their sound playing the
town’s nightclub scene, channelling
rock and funk influences through
traditional Igbo lyrics and rhythms.
Sonny recalled how the Funkees’
postwar popularity contributed to
healing Nigeria’s divisions. “When
you started playing good music
everybody forgot. Things started
getting normal.”
Relocating to London in 1973,
the Funkees continued performing
until breaking up in 1977. Sonny
moved on to Grant’s band, the
Frontline Orchestra, touring and
appearing on four albums including
Walking on Sunshine (1978) and
Killer on the Rampage (1982).
During this period Sonny also
participated in Steel an’ Skin,
the activist Peter Blackman’s
percussion project promoting black
consciousness in schools, prisons and
hospitals. There Sonny met the steelpan
player Fimber Bravo, beginning a
collaboration that culminated in
their album BEAT (2000).
In 1986, Sonny left Grant to
establish a drum manufacturing
workshop near his home in Dalston,
east London, with his friend Spensa
Thornton, before joining African
Head Charge, put together by the
producer Adrian Sherwood with
the percussionist Bonjo Iyabinghi
Noah. Bonjo and Sonny’s percussive
interplay underpins the collective’s
album Songs of Praise (1990),
but after recording In Pursuit of
Shashamane Land (1995), Bonjo
returned to Ghana and African Head
Charge folded.
Sonny continued sessions,
gigs and teaching, reuniting
with the Funkees for several
UK performances in 2003. Two
Funkees-related releases followed,
Nigeria Special: Part 1 (2008) and
The Funkees: Dancing Time (2012).
In a final interview Sonny
declared, “I lived in rhythm, I was
born in rhythm. What God gave me
was rhythm and I will die with it.”
He is survived by his son, Ime,
and two daughters, Adiaha and Uyai,
from his marriage to Aster Paige,
which ended in divorce in 1982,
and by his grandchildren, Malachi
and Sade.
Robert Green
Our own threads and journeys
Each of us an infinitesimal part
Such that every wrong, tear or break
is ours too
Stitched into the very tapestry of us.
Joanna Skelt
Poet who saw writing as a way of
connecting schools in Sierra Leone
with those of Birmingham
My friend Joanna Skelt, who has
died of cancer aged 49, was a
poet who explored writing as an
expression of conflict and identity.
As Birmingham’s poet laureate in
2013-14, she brought the excitement
of the Blackpool illuminations
to a live-poetry Christmas lights
switch-on in Stirchley, ran writing
workshops that linked schools from
Freetown, Sierra Leone, with the
city, and worked with musicians
from Symphony Hall. In Connected
Journeys, the title poem of her 2014
collection, she wrote:
The city a kaleidoscope, a daring
Spread out like spokes, a web, itself a
giant wheel
Each of us carrying
Wrapped inside ourselves
Born in Staffordshire, to Ralph
Skelt, a science teacher, and Diana
(nee Hankey), Jo spent her early
childhood in Cornwall. The family
moved to Cambridgeshire and Jo
went to Longsands college, St Neots,
then Cambridge College of Art and
Technology before studying politics
at Hull University.
After graduation in 1990 she
returned to Cambridge to work as a
project officer for the International
Extension College. In 1997 she
travelled to Freetown to research
peace education, for her MA thesis
at University of Kent the same
year. In 2003 she set up Arena for
Change International, to promote
social participation as a means of
preventing conflict.
She wrote social studies books
for schools in countries including
Jamaica, Ethopia, Ghana and Sierra
Leone, for Macmillan Education,
and was poet-in-residence in
eight schools in Freetown and in
Birmingham (2009-10). While in
Sierra Leone, she also established
a writers’ network. In 2014 she
completed her PhD at Birmingham
University, and two years later
returned to its department of
African studies and anthropology as
a teaching fellow.
A solo parent with a young
daughter, Jo had a gift for gathering
friends. She bought a caravan she
named Dotty, and found community
with the Unitarians. She was treated
for breast cancer in 2015. When it
returned in 2017, she began a blog,
describing writing as a form of
agency, “re-tessellating pain … into
something which contains beauty (if
only in broken shards)”.
Jo is survived by her daughter, her
parents, and her brother.
Mandy Ross
Howard Rees
Chief veterinary officer whose
measures led to the virtual
elimination of BSE in cattle
My former colleague Howard Rees,
who has died aged 89, was the chief
veterinary officer who dealt with the
problem of salmonella in eggs in the
1980s and introduced the measures
that eventually saw off the problem
of BSE in cattle. He was widely
regarded as the most able veterinary
public servant of his generation.
On retirement in 1988 he became
president of the World Organisation
for Animal Health’s animal health
code commission in Paris and under
his presidency the commission
drafted guidelines that dealt with
the international trade in livestock in
the context of BSE. He held the post
for nine years and was awarded the
organisation’s gold medal in 1994.
Howard was born in Llanelli, the
son of Walter and Margaret Rees,
and attended the grammar school
there before going on to the Royal
Veterinary College in London. He
qualified as a veterinary surgeon
in 1951. After a short period in
general practice he joined the state
veterinary service, which, he said,
gave him more time to play rugby.
On his posting in Stafford he played
for the club there, the county and
the West Midlands.
He soon gained valuable
experience of disease problems in
the livestock industry. This was a
time when infectious diseases such
as swine fever, bovine brucellosis
and tuberculosis had not yet been
brought under control.
He was posted to the service’s
headquarters at Tolworth, London,
in 1973 and became chief veterinary
officer in 1980. His most notable
early achievement was to lead the
team that completed the eradication
of brucellosis, a disease that was
widespread in cattle herds. As CVO
he had to deal with the salmonella
crisis and, shortly before he retired,
the potentially catastrophic
problem of bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE). It was on his
watch that the government rapidly
introduced the ruminant feed ban,
which eventually led to the virtual
elimination of the disease.
Howard had what the Welsh call
“dawn”, the gift of foresight. This
enabled him to identify potential
problems before they became
apparent to others. But he also had
a practical intellect that meant his
judgment was trusted on difficult
courses of action.
When he eventually retired,
he and his wife, Mollie, moved to
Pennard on the Gower coast. He is
survived by Mollie (nee Collins),
whom he married in 1952, and by
their four children, 14 grandchildren
and five great-grandchildren.
Gareth Davies
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:11 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Monday 16 April 2018 The Guardian
Sent at 15/4/2018 17:11
 @guardianobits
of six children of Dalbara Singh, who
was in the British military police,
and Naranjan Kaur. When Jaginder
was nine his father retired and the
family went to live in India. At 17,
Jaginder went back to Malaysia to
work, including as a chauffeur at the
Burmese embassy.
In 1962 he married Surjit Kaur, a
seamstress, in India. Later that year,
he moved to Southall and worked as
a lorry driver on the M4, which was
being built at the time. After two
years he moved to Reading, and my
mother came over to join him.
From 1976 Jaginder worked as a
driver and loader for British Airways;
he took early retirement in 1992, but
within weeks took a job at Cater-Air.
He left after five years to work on
the rail-air buses between Reading
and Heathrow, then finally bought a
black cab, which he drove until 2003.
Surjit died in 2006. Dad is
survived by three daughters, Baljit,
Rajwant and Sarbjit, two sons,
Randhir and me, seven grandsons,
and by a brother and a sister.
Satwant Singh Brar
Ann Totterdell
Jaginder Singh Brar
A founding trustee of the gurdwara
in Reading, and campaigner for the
right of Sikhs to wear a turban
My father, Jaginder Singh Brar, who
has died aged 79, was a founder
member of the Sri Guru Singh
Sabha Gurdwara, the Sikh temple in
Southall, London, and went on to
lead the establishment of a thriving
Sikh community in Reading.
As one of six founding trustees,
he rallied the few dozen Sikhs in
Reading in the early 1970s to buy a
spiritual home there. At the time,
Sikhs in the UK were campaigning
against having to wear a helmet
while riding motorcycles. The fight
led to the Motorcycle Crash Helmets
(Religious Exemption) Act 1976. For
the campaign, Jaginder would recite
poems such as one that ran, “This is
the turban that fought the last two
world wars without the helmet; no
one cared back then, so why now?”
He was born in Ipoh, Malaysia, one
Newspaper and literary editor, and
co-author of a book about her son,
who died of a rare cancer aged five
My friend Ann Totterdell, who
has died aged 73, worked as a
film reviewer and features and
fashion editor for newspapers and
magazines such as 19, Woman and
the Financial Times, before writing
a book with her partner about the
death of their son, 5½ x 3: The Short
Life and Death of Joe Buffalo Stuart.
Ann was born in Willesden,
north-west London, to Frederick, a
gas-fitter, and Alice (nee Holtom),
and attended Hendon County
grammar school. She began work as
a technical librarian at the General
Electric Company Hirst Research
Centre in Wembley. There she
met Peter Totterdell, an electrical
engineer, and they married in 1965.
Peter supported her desire to
write and funded her journalism
studies. He died in 1973. Ann then
met Alex Stuart, a writer, and a
year later they moved in together
in Soho. During this period Ann
worked as a journalist. In 1983, she
and Alex had a child, Joe Buffalo.
After being diagnosed with a Wilms
tumour, a rare and aggressive form
of cancer, Joe died in 1989. His death
devastated Alex and Ann and they
separated shortly after publishing
their memoir.
In 1991 Ann applied to study
classics at University College
London, where she rebuilt her
life. It was there that I met Ann, an
elegant woman drinking Earl Grey
tea while rolling up a “medicinal
cigarette”. She attained a first-
class degree, then completed
a master’s. Declining an invitation
to begin a doctorate, she returned
to freelancing as an editor and
researcher, working with authors,
notably John Sutherland on his
biography of Stephen Spender and
other works, as well as on Zachary
Leader’s life of Kingsley Amis and
Jeremy Treglown’s study of VS
Pritchett. Sutherland joked that
Ann was, as regards literature, the
finest truffle hound in town.
Benjamin Lawrence
From the archive
April 1955
People’s belief in
Einstein’s goodness
On 19 April 1955, the day after the death of the theoretical
physicist Albert Einstein in Princeton, New Jersey, the
political theorist David Mitrany wrote about his friend
Sir Alan Dawtry
Town clerk of Westminster city
council who created the present
pattern of the 32 London boroughs
Sir Alan Dawtry, who has died aged
102, survived combat in the second
world war to become a leading
figure in local government. In
1956 he became the town clerk of
Westminster city council (I followed
him in that job, renamed chief
executive, 30 years later). In 1958,
he introduced parking meters in
Britain. He played a major part in
the reorganisation that followed the
London Government Act 1963, and
created the present pattern of the 32
London boroughs.
In 1977 Alan negotiated the
purchase of a new computer for
Westminster council from the
US company Sperry Rand, which
promptly appointed him chairman
of their UK subsidiary, a job that he
held for nine years until 1986.
He was born in Sheffield, son of
Melancthon and Kate Dawtry. After
leaving King Edward VII school,
he took a law degree at Sheffield
University (which later conferred an
honorary doctorate on him), then
became a police prosecutor with
Sheffield city council.
On the outset of war, Alan joined
the army. In 1940 he was stranded
in France and made his way to
Cherbourg, where only one ship
remained in the harbour. Alan found
the captain to be drunk, arrested
him and sailed across to Britain.
There, Iain Macleod, the future
Conservative minister, served under
him. One night Alan refused to play
cards with Macleod, because he had
been drinking. Macleod emptied
his revolver into Alan’s room and
at breakfast demanded an apology
from Alan for refusing to play.
Alan took part in the landings in
Salerno and Anzio, Italy, for which
he was made an MBE. In Milan in
1945, he gave the order to cut down
the bodies of Mussolini and his
mistress Clara Petacci, which had
been hung out on public display.
Alan married for the first time at
the age of 81, to Sally Chalklin, who
survives him.
Rodney Brooke
Submission and
publication of
all Other lives
pieces and
Obituaries page
letters is subject
to our terms and
Einstein writing
out an equation
for the density
of the Milky Way
on a visit to the
Mount Wilson
in Pasadena,
California, 1931
ven a layman can tell what made Albert
Einstein famous as a scientist. But what
was the secret of his truly amazing fame
as a man? Fame is not the right word.
For it was not anything like the gaping
of the humble at some awe-inspiring
oracle, or like the cheering of some
mighty personage by an excited crowd.
Rather it was something quite simple and human, a
genuine personal affection by many thousands for
someone they never knew or were likely to know
personally. They may have heard that he was a great
man, but somehow they seemed to know that he was
a good man. Anything that came from him, anything
connected with him, apparently could be taken on trust.
In the years before the second world war, when
we were both at the Institute for Advanced Study at
Princeton, we used to go for an hour’s walk together
every day. Even in the quiet by-lanes passers-by would
grin and greet him with a “Good afternoon” – people
were really glad and felt better for having glimpsed him.
Time and again he abandoned the retiring and
undemanding life of his choice in order to join
colleagues in a fight for some general issue or other. And
of course he was utterly uncompromising when it was
a matter of scientific truth – uncompromising above all
with himself. Though I had no mathematics at all, now
and then he used to tell me about what he was doing –
and how clear and simple it all seemed when he spoke!
On such an occasion, in 1937 or 1938, he told me in
some excitement that he thought he had found the
key to unified field theory, but six months later during
a walk he said quietly that calculations had proved
his hypothesis to be all wrong. “What are you going
to do now?” “I am going to publish it.” “But why if it
is wrong?” “Why? To save perhaps another fool from
wasting six months on the same idea!”
Section:GDN 1J PaGe:12 Edition Date:180416 Edition:01 Zone:
Sent at 15/4/2018 16:46
The Guardian Monday 16 April 2018
Killer Sudoku
Each letter of the alphabet makes at least one appearance in the grid,
and is represented by the same number wherever it appears. The letters
decoded should help you to identify other letters and words in the grid.
The normal rules of
Sudoku apply: fill each
row, column and 3x3 box
with all the numbers from
1 to 9. In addition, the
digits in each inner shape
(marked by dots) must
add up to the number in
the top corner of that box.
No digit can be repeated
within an inner shape.
Sudoku no 4034
Killer Sudoku 601
Futoshiki 601
3 > 2
4 > 1
1 < 3 >
4 > 3
Cryptic crossword
Solution No. 27,477
This week’s winners of Can
You Solve My Problems? are:
John Minkes, Cardiff; Thad
Jones, London; Catherine
Ward, Norwich; Mrs Davis,
Turvey, Bedford; Colin Kalra,
Llansilin, Shropshire.
Please allow 28 days for
Guardian cryptic crossword No 27,484 set by Nutmeg
Stuck? For help call 0906 200 83 83.
Calls cost £1.10 per minute, plus your
phone company’s access charge.
Service supplied by ATS.
Call 0330 333 6946 for customer
service (charged at standard rate).
Want more? Get access to more than
4,000 puzzles at
crossword. To buy puzzle books, visit or call
0330 333 6846.
1,6 Tailor claims T-shirts to be what
kids send Santa (9,4)
8,9 Naive type acquitted by foreign
court? (8,6)
10,11 Comic butler needed no words
to tickle audience (6,8)
12 Crushed ice pack not quite what
the doctor ordered? (6)
15 I, for one, pressed into backing
art galleries … (8)
16,19 … gallery on its own, ignoring
the odds, gets what’s left (8,6)
21 Guardian’s eclipsed by
broadsheet — by 3 points, or 2
after lunch (8)
22 Rich little woman behind rector
in church (6)
24,25 Sponsors usually have it,
dressed to catch the eye (6,8)
26,27 Princesses had mysterious
source of funds (4,9)
1 Ready to get stuck in lavatory?
Repeat that (3-2)
2 Like a lozenge doctor introduced
to stricken choir (7)
3 Retreating, for one European, is
offensive in wartime (5)
4 Uplifting piece of text set to
music for annual exhibition
5 Discontented social worker
knowing one’s inclined to appear
thus (9)
6 Magnificent Medici traditions
unknown in number (7)
7 A means of getting up tail first,
possibly (5,4)
13 He turned on blokes breaking
dad’s spectacles (9)
14 Alleged Tory dissent finally
resolved (9)
17 Jail sentence to get longer (7)
18 Plant-based food cooking almost
silently (7)
20 Case of teachers embracing core
non-scientific subjects (3,4)
22 Tasty dish that is served with
chip topping? (5)
23 One ponders on problem while
climbing (5)
Журналы и газеты
Размер файла
1 262 Кб
the guardian, journal
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа