AI Does SPAD (1)

 Asking ChatGPT...

Write a manifesto for the Conservative Party that is most likely to help them win the next General Election

Manifesto for a Strong and Prosperous Future: The Conservative Party Vision

Protecting Tradition, Empowering Progress

Introduction

In these critical times, the Conservative Party presents a vision that combines the enduring values of tradition with the dynamism of progress. Our manifesto is centered on fostering a strong and prosperous future for all, while preserving the foundations that have made our nation great. By embracing innovation, empowering individuals, and securing our nation's interests, we will lead the charge toward a brighter tomorrow.

1. Economic Growth and Fiscal Responsibility

We commit to a low-tax, pro-business environment that incentivizes investment, job creation, and economic growth. Our plan includes:

• Reducing the burden of unnecessary regulations on businesses, allowing them to thrive and innovate.
• Ensuring fiscal responsibility by carefully managing public spending, eliminating waste, and reducing the budget deficit.

2. Education and Skills Development

We recognize that a well-educated and skilled workforce is essential for our nation's success. Our pledges include:

• Investing in schools to ensure every child has access to a world-class education.
• Expanding vocational training and apprenticeship programs to equip individuals with practical skills for the modern job market.

3. Healthcare and Social Welfare

We are committed to a strong and sustainable healthcare system that leaves no one behind. Our proposals involve:

• Increasing funding for the National Health Service (NHS) to reduce waiting times and enhance patient care.
• Targeted welfare reforms that encourage self-sufficiency while protecting the most vulnerable members of society.

4. Infrastructure and Innovation

We recognize the importance of modern infrastructure for economic growth and connectivity. Our plan entails:

• Investing in transportation, broadband, and green energy projects to create jobs and enhance connectivity.
• Promoting research and development through tax incentives, fostering innovation across sectors.

5. Law and Order

We are dedicated to ensuring the safety and security of all citizens. Our approach includes:

• Supporting law enforcement agencies with the resources and training needed to maintain public safety.
• Strengthening laws to address emerging challenges such as cybercrime and domestic terrorism.

6. Immigration and National Identity

We believe in controlled and fair immigration that preserves our national identity. Our approach includes:

• Implementing an immigration system that prioritizes skills, contributions to the economy, and national security.
• Promoting English language proficiency and social integration for newcomers.

7. Environmental Stewardship

We acknowledge our responsibility to safeguard the environment for future generations. Our commitments include:

• Setting ambitious targets for reducing carbon emissions and transitioning to renewable energy sources.
• Encouraging responsible consumption, waste reduction, and sustainable practices across industries.

8. International Relations

We pledge to uphold our nation's interests on the global stage. Our strategy involves:

• Forging strong trade agreements that benefit our economy and maintain our sovereignty.
• Supporting international development efforts that promote stability and prosperity in less privileged regions.

Conclusion

In this manifesto, the Conservative Party embraces the essence of our values while embracing the opportunities of the future. We believe in a society where individuals are empowered, businesses flourish, and the nation prospers. By uniting tradition and progress, we will secure a stronger, more prosperous future for our citizens, and together, we will prevail in the next General Election.

Julian Assange: a letter to the Home Secretary

Peter Hitchens has urged a write-in to the Home Secretary. Here is my letter; I hope you can send one also - and urge others to do so.
__________________________

Dear Home Secretary

Request to Halt the Extradition of Julian Assange

I appeal to you to decline the extradition to the USA of Mr Julian Assange, for several reasons.

Firstly, it is widely suspected that the espionage charges levelled against him are an inappropriate or even improper use of US law and arise from political purposes. There are also question marks over the motivation and conduct of the authorities in Sweden in pursuing longstanding investigations that were discontinued in 2019 following his removal from the Ecuadorian Embassy and being placed under arrest here. Further, doubts have been expressed about some aspects of the proceedings in Westminster Magistrates Court and the extent to which they may have been influenced by external considerations and agencies. In a globally high-profile case such as this it is especially important that Britain should be seen to uphold its traditional commitment to justice and the liberty of the individual.

Secondly, some worry that Mr Assange may not face a fair trial if extradited, given that his case is cast in terms of a threat to US national security at a time when public feelings are febrile. Moreover, bearing in mind his fragile and apparently declining physical and mental health there is unease over the treatment he may receive in jail before, during and after trial. Notwithstanding assurances given by US authorities, there may still be, as there has previously been, a failure by them to safeguard a potentially suicidal prisoner.

Finally, the Assange affair has far wider implications for the principles of freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and the protection of whistleblowers worldwide. It is essential to recognize the potential chilling effect that his extradition could have on investigative journalism and the critical role it plays in a democratic society. By declining the extradition request, you can reaffirm Britain’s commitment to these fundamental values.

I humbly request that you call a halt to these proceedings and release Mr Assange.

Not So Smart

This isn’t about me, it’s about you. It’s about what The System can do to you if it wants; and if it can be done, it will be done.

It does begin with me, in a small way, but the implications are big. A short while ago I was emailed by my energy provider to say I needed to fit smart meters. Having made it clear that I wanted to be the last customer in the country to have a smart meter, I then got a message that someone would be round to fit it soon. I exploded with a how-dare you etc.

The complaints department replied:

‘The metering appointment booked for the 11th July shows booked by Customer using anonymous URL. This suggests that you have booked this appointment yourself I am sorry if this is not the case?’

I didn’t do it. I don’t know who did or why but I’m not after any particular individual or company and I don’t want any speculation; the point is about our vulnerability in the Information Age.

Daily we give away our data privacy, or entrust our data to corporations, to obtain services online. Regularly we read of breaches and abuses; and not just read: our bank account was hacked a few years ago and we still haven’t a clue how our details were obtained (we don’t even do online banking!)

If criminals are bad, governments can be worse, because they have far more power and their motivation is nothing so crass as mere financial greed. Peter Hitchens has raised the case of a man he doesn’t much like, a video blogger called Graham Phillips, who was placed on the UK Government’s sanctions list last summer.

‘As far as I know, he is the first British citizen to be treated in this way. His assets have been frozen. His bank accounts are blocked. He also cannot pay those to whom he owes money.’

Consider: those bank accounts do not belong to the Government. This is the State using private corporations to victimise its citizen. We saw the same last year with the protesting Canadian truckers - and the people who supported them.

That sort of collusion is characteristic, some might say, of a form of fascism; or communism if you consider similar actions in China; let’s settle on ‘totalitarianism.’ Yet this is the allegedly liberal West.

Let’s come back to the smart meter. Not only can it tell outsiders how much energy you use and when, it can be used remotely to disconnect you for non-payment. Who is to say that a dissident might not have his heating and lighting cut off if the government wishes to sanction him? What law prevents the State from doing this? How about your water supply?

How about your smartphone, used by so many for everything including shopping and travel? Imagine switching it on one day to find the screen saying ‘no service’ and all your data in the Cloud frozen, unable to be migrated to another provider? Do you think that could not possibly happen? The precedent has been set already with private banking services.

We have a choice: to see the threat and become completely obedient and quiet as mice, or to remain members of the Awkward Squad; irascible, difficult, sometimes unreasonable - but free.

Who will guard the Guardian?

… plus Private Eye and The Spectator? I look to publications like those to give me an idea of what’s really going on that’s of any importance; at least, I used to.

But when it comes to the official narrative, objectivity flies out of the window. For example, where Ukraine is concerned, ‘it was the Russians.’

• The Russians invaded Ukraine without provocation. Even Peter Hitchens, who proves otherwise, feels obliged to say repeatedly that the action was foolish and inexcusable; I suppose that is the price for his being allowed to say anything at all.
• It was the Russians who bombed the Nordstream pipeline, against all logic and in the face of new evidence further suggestive of the involvement of the US Navy. As Matt Taibbi relates, that story has undergone a number of mutations, the latest being that the sabotage was carried out by Ukrainians with US foreknowledge - I have visions of Three Men in a Boat (To Say Nothing of the Dog.)
• It was the Russians who fired a rocket into Poland - oops, sorry: the American religious Right must look for another chance to trigger WWIII and the Rapture.
• Now it seems the Russians have bombed their own dam in Kherson, which supplies water to Crimea - water blocked by the Ukrainian government in 2014 when the Crimeans sought independence, thereby reducing the peninsula’s agricultural irrigation by 90 per cent.

Putin is mad, is one story; perhaps we’re madder to believe it, but maddest of all must be the Washington war party, playing their children’s game of ‘What’s the time, Mister Russian Wolf?’ Russia has the most nuclear weapons in the world and the Dead Hand system, designed to burn up the world if they lose.

Like King Lear, President Biden could say

I am a very foolish fond old man, Fourscore and upward, not an hour more nor less; And, to deal plainly, I fear I am not in my perfect mind.

and as in Shakespeare’s play, those on whom he depends threaten the destruction of the State. Could we at least name them, question them? Where is the Fourth Estate when we most need it?

Muzzled. If the little boy who cried out that the Emperor was naked did that today, he would be held incommunicado in a supermax jail.

Better still, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of vicious persecution. The US swiftly abandoned its ‘Disinformation Governance Board’ - possibly fearing it might prove a double-edged sword in the event of a swing to the Right in last November’s midterm elections - but the BBC has pressed on with its Verify program, despite its own history of spreading fake news.

How about the Guardian newspaper (a favourite read in Broadcasting House)? It has formed an unhealthily close working relationship with the intelligence services following the embarrassing revelations of Edward Snowden and Julian Assange, as Jimmy Dore explores in his recent YouTube video ‘How The Guardian Newspaper Became A Pro-War Garbage Rag.’

Turning to Private Eye, when the Ukraine business flared up I expected their usual informative and skeptical take on it. Not so, this time: Issue 1570 (April 2022) featured a series of cartoons implying that Putin’s ‘Special Military Operation’ deliberately targeted theatres, schools, women and children; one had ‘Putin Family Butcher’ stropping a carving knife in the front window of his shop.

Concurrently, Russian news sources (e.g. RT) were blocked from us and Google’s Adsense Team even forbade the expression of contrarian opinions (round-robin email received by this writer, 13 April 2022):

‘This pause includes, but is not limited to, claims that imply victims are responsible for their own tragedy or similar instances of victim blaming, such as claims that Ukraine is committing genocide or deliberately attacking its own citizens.’

The Spectator magazine, generally considered educated and liberal-minded, has nevertheless been consistently parti pris on Zelenskyy’s behalf, again not only in its columns but in its imagery - the cover of its 27 May edition had a slanty-eyed Putin goose-stepping on a red carpet while a crafty Zel clad in his trademark squaddy top prepares to pull the rug out from under him. Putin as a despicable, malevolent Asiatic quasi-Nazi… some Russians have taken to describing themselves resentfully as ‘steppen*gg*rs.’

Then there is the subject of Covid and the associated program of prophylactic injections. Claims for vaccine injuries have multiplied to the point where the government compensation scheme has had to detail 80 workers to administer them, yet as The Conservative Woman website has shown a few days ago there was a concerted campaign orchestrated by the Government to censor TCW, which in response has added DF - ‘Defending Freedom’ - to its title (disclosure: I have written for them myself.)

We depend on the news media to see the truth for us; instead, they are guiding us on a dangerous road with the distorted vision of a bleary, cross-eyed drunk. ‘Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?’ - who will guard those guardians?

Reposted from Substack

Those evil, greedy doctors!

The BMA says the pay of a junior doctor has fallen by 26 per cent in real terms since 2008/09 because pay rises have been below inflation. It is calling for 'full pay restoration', which would amount to a 35 per cent pay rise and be worth up to £20,000 extra for some medics.

- Daily Mail

Never mind the 'some medics' - a ploy to get us envious and angry; the maths is correct. 

If your real-terms pay drops by 26 points from 100 to 74, you need (1.35*74) to get back to 100 where you started, i.e. a 35% increase. 

This is not a pay rise but, as the doctors' association says, a restoration - and I haven't seen a claim for the money lost in the intervening years.

It's what happens when a government loses control of inflation. 

In a way it's a rerun of the 1970s, when Arab oil producers retaliated against the West for supporting Israel in Middle Eastern conflict, by inflating the price of oil. This made everything pricier in our energy-dependent economy and triggered a wave of industrial action as groups of workers tried to recoup their real-terms earnings losses.

Yes, there were some Marxists in unions trying to destabilise the system so that - the great Marxian dream - a better world would magically arise from the ruins; but there was a lot more going on that was not doctrinaire-political.

I remember two words cropping up again and again in these disputes: 

'parity' - a claim to get the same pay as another group doing the same work somewhere else; and 

'differential' - a claim for higher pay by more skilled workers who found that despite their more valuable expertise, their earnings were getting closer to that of less skilled workers as the latter won their pay bargaining cases.

The 'oil shock' started in 1973, the Conservative government fell in 1974 and the incoming Labour Government had to deal with industrial disputes for the next five years.

It was a very long time before I found out that Alan Bleasdale's BBC drama series 'Boys from the Blackstuff', described as

'TV's most complete dramatic response to the Thatcher era and as a lament to the end of a male, working class British culture'

may have been screened in 1982, but was based on Bleasdale's 'The Black Stuff' Play For Today, scripted in 1978 during the Prime Ministership of Labour's James Callaghan.

In rugby there is a move called a 'hospital pass' where you throw the ball to a colleague who is then obliterated by the fast-oncoming opposition. Similarly, some political parties may be tempted to lose a General Election so that the 'other lot' has to clean up the mess and take the blame for all the hard things they are forced to do.

This could be where we are now. 'Demirep' speculates that both Labour in the UK and the Democrats in the US are trying not to win the next election because they can see what is coming:

PandeMIC: the enemy above

My wife opened her email yesterday and found a recruitment ad from GCHQ - yes, really. She’s been retired for twenty years but this looks like a dream opportunity - she could ‘work from home’ simply by spying on me. For the system has become so crap and evil that it has radicalised me.

‘Crap’: all that cyber-snooping and GCHQ can’t analyse its data to see why my wife is not in the frame for a job with them! But then, how come two Russian agents were allowed to fly into the UK and wander around Salisbury in 2018 during Toxic Dagger, an annual military exercise themed around chemical warfare? And that narrative of the Skripal poisonings, which has more holes than a string vest! I thought our spooks were good at lying.

‘Evil’: it’s not just foreigners who study the technology of mass murder. The laboratory at Porton Down is less than 20 minutes’ drive away from Salisbury and has a long history of potentially lethal experiments both in-house on Service personnel and covertly on the civilian population across the country.

We have had a UN Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) since 1975, forbidding the development of such things; yet across the world, well-paid and -pensioned whitecoats are at work on them. ‘Oh, but we have to do this research, because of what the Other Lot might do,’ they will tell us. ‘This is for defence!’ But everybody can make that excuse; really, the whole lot of them ARE the Other Lot. Go back to the BWC and try harder, harder! Meanwhile, if only they could be rounded up and sent to some remote Pacific island, concocting their hellbrews in segregated valleys and constant mutual fear.

Actually, that may possibly have started already. Seven years ago the French opened a ‘biosafety laboratory’ in Tahiti, allegedly for research into mosquito-borne diseases. Oddly, the original announcement in Tahiti News has since disappeared and the laboratory is not on the main island but on a tiny two-square-mile atoll called Tetiaroa - hardly a convenient commute for the staff. Still, let’s try to believe it is what it says; at least it’s safely isolated.

There are four categories of lab biosafety precautions; Tetiaroa is equipped to NSB3 containment standard; good, but not the best. A microbiology facility in Beijing was also a Level 3, yet the SARS virus escaped from there, twice; presumably that is why China’s first NSB4 lab was constructed in Wuhan, 650 miles away and with a population a third the size of the nation’s capital.

Now the West is claiming that despite Wuhan’s top-level safety rating - the same as for the UK’s Porton Down - Covid was another lab leak. That is worrying, for as the Telegraph and Mail have reported, Imperial College conducted ‘gain of function’ research on the Covid virus last year in a lower, level 3 setting. Are our boffins definitely more safety-conscious, less fallible than the Chinese? They were combining elements of the original disease - one that is estimated to have killed 6.8 million people worldwide so far - with those of Delta and Omicron variants. What were they hoping to achieve? What if they had succeeded in breeding a new strain that was as transmissible as WuFlu but far more lethal? Was that the intention?

There are so many potential monsters of modern war under construction: biological (including genetic targeting of ethnic groups), chemical, atomic, drones, robotics, artificial intelligence… Think of all those clever people preparing a Hell on Earth, for nothing but money and power, things that they and their superiors can enjoy for only a blink of history’s eye. That is why I say the enterprise is evil: an irrational project to cause lasting harm for the sake of fleeting gains.

President Eisenhower warned us about the ‘military-industrial complex’ in 1961:

We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. . . . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

How much do we invest in peace research?

In this context it is very interesting to hear what Tucker Carlson of Fox News has been saying recently. Leftists often dub Carlson ‘far right’, i.e. not a revolutionary Communist; yet unlike them he can confess to being mistaken and ashamed, as on the issue of his former support for the Iraq War.

Carlson now goes further, drawing a line between the murder of JFK, the defenestration of Nixon and the derailment of Trump’s foreign policy. What have they in common?

‘Elements in the federal bureaucracy… working to undermine the American system of government… Unelected lifers in the federal agencies make the biggest decisions in American government and crush anyone who tries to rein them in and in the process, our democracy becomes a joke.’

Peace initiatives like those the three Presidents above attempted are a threat to the Masters Of War whom we must seek to oppose. Quite possibly radical change - reform - may come not from the anarchic Left, but from the decent-hearted faction among conservatives: not the money-mad globalist British Tories, not the crush-the-poor American Rightists. It will take radicals like us, not ‘woke’ but disillusioned, who see emerging from Pandora’s box the last and only real gift: Hope.

Fake freedom: transport

Freedom is not simply a matter of personal choice.

Let’s take freedom of movement for example. Here is the unperson Laurence Fox being interviewed by the BBC at the 18 February Oxford protest against the Council’s ‘15 minute city’ proposals to limit vehicle movement:

The interviewer tells Fox it’s a choice: either allow the Council to promote clean air by these restrictions, or see motorists zoom around willy-nilly, polluting the atmosphere.

Fox points out that the fad for ‘clean air zones’ benefits the privileged who live and work in the expensive central areas; and that mothers dropping off their children at school will create more toxic emissions as they are forced to take the long way round via the ring road.

It’s a false dichotomy. Neither side mentioned the possibilities of public transport.

Years ago I visited a friend in Sheffield. At that time the bus system was generously subsidised so that one could travel into the centre for literally a few pennies - the onboard machine pressed the coins onto a paper ticket roll so you could see exactly what you used to pay the fare. The service was so regular and cheap that even car drivers used it instead, especially for an evening out to get full of Sam Smith’s ale.

Then came privatisation. Even now, some think every service would be better run as a business for profit; well, so are banks, and see where they have got us today. Nevertheless, the opportunities for the ambitious and greedy - and the friends they make in public office - are irresistible temptations to ignore the maxim ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’

In Birmingham the system was well fixed when I arrived in the mid-Seventies. The Number 11 went 26 miles round the Outer Circle and was kept strictly to timetable by a ring of clocks on the route, into which the driver would insert a key to punch the internal recording roll at the right moment. We could forgive the driver his occasional stop at the pissoir on Hamstead Road, or nipping out for a packet of chips to put on the dashboard, or even his regrettable habit of leaving the bus door open in cold weather; the thing is, we got where we wanted to go, and arrived on time.

Then in the mid-Eighties such smoothly-run operations were disrupted by ‘deregulation’. Routes were cherry-picked and less profitable ones made less frequent. The Outer Circle clocks disappeared; and some directors made millions.

Now if public transport becomes more expensive and less regular, you are going to need and want a car even if you didn’t have one before. This becomes a feedback loop so that the bus service shrinks; and the social mix using it alters - the old, the poor, schoolchildren; it gets grungier and rowdier.

If cities want cleaner air and less crowded roads they don’t have to set up road blocks and charge for entry into ‘Clean Air Zones’ and fine people who forget to pay. Instead, they could run clean electric buses (and trams and trains) frequently, cheaply and at all hours. The cost of the subsidies would be more than covered by the economic and tax revenue boost as money saved personally by not needing a motor car could ‘fructify in the pockets of the people.’

Or is it that the hairy-eared tyrants in local and national politics prefer control, coercion and punishment? I fear it may be so.

New today on Substack !

 Don't smash the system, rebuild it

Cash for Ukraine: an alternative

Last year, the UK supplied £2.3 billion in military aid to Ukraine and plans to do the same in 2023. This is odd, because we have not declared war on Russia and Russia has not declared war on us.

It is also expensive. There were 32.2 million UK income tax payers in 2022 so for my wife and me those two years represent a compulsory joint contribution of £285.

That’s quite a lot for us and surely the money could be better spent on other official projects such as secretly euthanising my friends in hospital, employing the fascist 77th Brigade to spread disinformation on social media, and barricading urban streets to impede the free movement of the populace.

Please note, I call the 77th and their numerous ilk fascists because they are part of a system of oppression on behalf of corporate interests including not only the military-industrial complex but the government itself, which has become a monolithic corporation positively exulting in the nuisances it is able to visit on ordinary people - as we see from the Hancock Covidisaster emails recently leaked by Isabel Oakeshott.

Since killing Russians in Ukraine - and far more Ukrainians, to boot - is a sort of hobby or sport instead of a public necessity, it should be financed by its supporters on a voluntary basis: personal approaches by chuggers and churglars; internet crowdfunding; maybe even a telethon - ‘Fascists In Need’?

The spiel would be on traditional lines:

‘£x buys a bullet to fire into the femoral artery of a Russian prisoner of war; £y purchases a cubic yard of the concrete needed to block off fresh water to Crimea again; £z is the price of a roll of silk wallpaper to decorate a foreign bolthole for the former TV nudist comedian turned tyrant who is such a lethal ‘Servant of the People’ that he is running out of people to serve and has to send out gangs to forcibly recruit boys and old men.’

And then when they come along with GoFundMe we shall have the liberty to tell them to GoFu**Yourself.

New on 'Now and Next': No Debate, No Democracy

 Here: https://rolfnorfolk.substack.com/p/no-debate-no-democracy

'People who complain about the power structure call in aid the notion of democracy and the will of the people. There’s a hazy notion of ‘hey, let’s all get together and do X.’

'No chance. Quite obviously the people love to quarrel about the smallest things, as we can see every day on social media.

'New technology brings in new modes of action...'

- continued as per the above link. 

Our Dying Rooms

 Is it incompetence or is it official policy for hospitals to kill the old?

Actually, not just the old. Long pre-Covid times, the wife of a friend of mine contracted an infection and was taken to hospital. When her husband got there he found her unattended and untubed in bed (this was when hospitals had beds.) She needed fluids to flush out the toxins, but had nothing and the nurses seemed unable or unwilling to do anything and there was no doctor in sight.

My friend is a big and - when he chooses to be - a formidable person; he said he wanted a line run into her immediately and made it clear he would be taking names and was prepared to inflict thorough procedural wrath if staff didn’t jump to it. I’m perfectly convinced that she would not be alive today had it not been for her lion of a man.

She was, I think, in her thirties at the time.

I’ve written before about another friend who didn’t feel safe in hospital and how his equally formidable brother had to push for him to get home again. It was a story of reluctance to treat, crucial X-ray evidence overlooked, prizing ward tidiness over patient nurture, staff clumsiness and failure to follow the post-operative programme set by the surgeon; of supplying equipment for use at home and then recommending it not be used by the family; of an incompetently monitored drug regime. He was a good, brilliant man and died prematurely, but mercifully in a hospice, at the age of 77.

Last month I lost another, also aged 77. He had been a keen skier and qualified instructor, but had apparently started to suffer from heart failure. I hadn’t known he was in hospital until his daughter messaged me to say he was terminally ill but was ‘being made comfortable.’

When I visited the ward I had to don a plastic gown and gloves: he now had c.diff. as well as his heart problem - acquired how? From where? His eyes were half open but unseeing; I told him about his just-born grandson and left a congratulations card; he seemed unconscious throughout until just at the end, when his eyes turned in my direction, but I’m not sure he recognised me.

The second time, a day or two later, I brought some flowers and put them on his chest, because I’d remembered that Bertrand Russell’s wife did that for her husband when he lay semi-comatose (his eyes welled up with tears; he eventually recovered.) Sadly in January most flowers have no appreciable scent, but it made no difference: my friend’s eyes were shut and he was breathing stertorously; he knew nothing.

Why did he know nothing? He was heavily drugged. I asked about hydration; the nurse told me all fluids were now withheld. He was dead a couple of days afterwards.

For that is the ‘care’ he had been receiving. The system previously known as the Liverpool Care Pathway became infamous, but all the NHS has done is to change the name to ‘end-of-life care’; I hope my friend’s daughter didn’t understand the implications. ‘Care’ is a vile medical euphemism - like the ‘harvest’ of organs from dead children, whose parents agreed to the use of what was misleadingly called ‘tissue samples.’

The patient is given powerful analgesics and allowed to perish from hunger and especially thirst; it is assumed that he cannot feel what would otherwise be the agonies of dehydration and of the consequent collapse of his organs.

And it tidies him out of the way. ‘Die faster, we need the beds.’

For in today’s soulless world, if we are nothing after we die, we are nothing now. We - and especially the old - are persons of no importance. You may as well put us out with the bins. All is okay as long as you use the right language, keep smiling and make sure the paperwork is straight.

The above cases are a pattern, and not localised: the examples I’ve given are from three hospitals in different parts of the country.

Yesterday I learned of a fourth, but one who got away, just. Another elderly man - a fellow writer and internet pal, very bright, widely experienced and full of life - was suddenly taken ill before Christmas and went into hospital in the east of England, to have emergency brain and bowel operations.

Actually, not an emergency; not at first. For when he was admitted unconscious, a different decision was taken; a Dying Room decision, of which he learned only a few days ago. Here is his account:

The wife received a phone call to be at the hospital, when I had been moved to [XXX], the following morning to have a meeting with the same doctor. She turned up at 10.00 but the doctor was not there: he had been called away on an emergency!

While she waited she found the room I had been put in, to find I was alone with no tubes, wires etc attached; very strange…

Despite her waiting for hours the doctor never appeared and another appointment was made for the following day.

She arrived with her friend, my neighbour and again the doctor was missing (?) She spoke to one of the nurses who was attending me and asked why there was no equipment attached to me; the nurse in a roundabout way said the doctor had removed the equipment and said no resuscitation (?)

Still no doctor, which annoyed the wife who started to ask questions. The nurse said she would try and contact him and would also try to contact his superior who was in the hospital that day.

Again, after hours, the other doctor turned up and after talking to the wife and nurses went in to see me. 15 minutes later he reappeared to say he did not understand the decision to not resuscitate as I showed more than enough life and had in my delirium attempted to get out of bed and leave!

He then arranged to take over my care with the two nurses who had been with me from the start and had me moved to a general ward. I was also for the first time given some food, which I had been deliberately starved of by the other doctor. The new doctor supervised me back to some sort of life and the rest is history.

The original doctor was not seen again in my vicinity. How come someone like that decides one's fate? If it hadn't been for the wife insisting on getting someone to look at me I would not be here.

I await further tales from these days when I was sedated or out of it; apparently there is more. One thing stands out: the good staff are very good but there is a percentage of those who should not be in the profession.

I was furious on his behalf and asked whether he would be making an official complaint. He replied:

My wife did consider suing the first doctor, but the advice was 'only if you have a recording of instructions.’ As he was not available at any time this would have been impossible and would have required statements from the two nurses which would not have happened. If she had been informed of the decision it might have been a different matter.

Naively I had thought that a ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ order (DNR) has to be agreed with next of kin; it may possibly have been like that once (remember how during the Covid panic there was a scandal about DNRs being completed without relatives’ knowledge?), but I’ve looked it up and it’s not so now.

However this goes beyond DNR: it’s ‘don’t bother.’ Perhaps the NHS should come up with a snappy mnemonic for the guidance of staff:

Do not feed and don’t hydrate
And then do not resuscitate

Oldies clutter up the place, costing money in pensions, healthcare and housing. Living too long in this country is a crime meriting capital punishment; but in the nicest possible way.

Compare that with the wonderful care Spectator columnist Jeremy Clarke, terminally ill with cancer, has received from the French medical system. Rather than face being culled here, I am beginning to give serious consideration to moving abroad, somewhere that has respect for life.

I understand there are lots of rubber boats going a-begging at Dover.