Blogs

Matthew Parris and Apologies

John Rentoul

polltax 218x300 Matthew Parris and ApologiesMatthew Parris has seen the error of his ways. In The Times today (pay wall) he writes about apologies and admissions of error, and says this:

The same is true of Mr Blair and Iraq. Maybe if we, his critics, could stop obsessing about his good faith and end the baying for some sort of apology, he in turn could re-examine events and his own responses. It would be interesting. It would be useful.

More useful than calling people insane because you disagree with them, certainly. It is not available on the internet any more, but Parris asked an early Question To Which The Answer Is No in The Times on 29 March 2003: “Are we witnessing the madness of Tony Blair?” Perhaps one day Parris will re-examine events and his own responses. It would be interesting and useful.

His next example was also interesting:

So far as I know, none of the Tory architects of the poll tax have ever taken public responsibility for the calamity. Again I’d seek no kind of apology, but would love to know what they now think about what went wrong and why. We might be able to discover who really wanted the measure: every commentary I’ve read (for instance from Chris Patten, the minister who had to implement it) hints that the author was going along with something already desired by others, and decided. Who were they? My own impression was that Margaret Thatcher herself had been rather wary of this potential hornet’s nest.

The idea that Thatcher was a reluctant and tentative advocate of the poll tax is charmingly endearing. The chap is still besotted.

By coincidence, one of the greatest living authorities on this subject spoke about it this week. Andrew Adonis, who has written the book, Failure in British Government: The Politics of the Poll Tax, mentioned it when he was speaking about his new book at the Mile End Group, at Queen Mary, University of London, on Tuesday. He said that all the people he and his co-authors interviewed about the poll tax (who did not include Thatcher) said that they didn’t think it was a good idea.

Except one.

Oliver Letwin.

Tagged in: ,
  • PurbeckPashmina

    That resembles hatred very closely. Sounds like a bloody religion.

  • porkfright

    It may just have escaped your notice that freedom of religious belief, of free speech, of the right to organise labour-are all part of a democratic country-as opposed to one hijacked by Neocons.

  • PurbeckPashmina

    I’ve not noticed that religious belief is immune to ridicule and examination. You should note how readily your imagined libertarianism and “socialism” lends itself to lying. I’ve been a duly elected shop steward, and later a Labour councillor. You? I’d guess neither. And I campaign for democracy in the Labour Party. You? You carp like a trot/tory with silly cheap untruths about “neo cons” – a term which is suitably wide and just intended as abuse.

  • jamesdar

    “The chap is still besotted.”
    Mr Rentoul, these words smack somewhat of pots calling kettles black.


Most viewed

Read

N/A

Property search
Browse by area

Latest from Independent journalists on Twitter