• The post you are reporting:
   
  Much has been said in parliament and written in the mainstreams recently about 'moderating' political language. All nonsense in my view: invective's been the currency of political exchange since well before Gillray called Pitt the Younger 'a toadstool upon a dunghill.' (Admittedly Gillray was artist not politician, but worse - or better! - has been spoken in parliament). It's just that modern politicians don't do it nearly so well, and end up sounding merely petulant. This weeping and wailing of the thin-skinned is lamentable, as choice abuse, sarcasm and contumely is what keeps many people tuned in, and actually contributes to humanising the useless b*stards. Besides, not a few honourable members have earned pocket money out of publishing anthologies of the stuff.
  
  Nevertheless, I cannot countenance the insulting reference to the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act as 'the Benn Act.' This is too gross a stinger: Tony Benn must be turning in his grave (or, if he was cremated, all shook up) that his surname should be associated with such a thing. Though I'm not knocked out by 'the surrender bill', it at least has the virtue of attempting a definition.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason