The Mirror Crack'd

I'm with Mick The sainted Mick Lynch, leader of the RMT rail union, has called on voters to "grow up" when it comes to the general election. If they want to get rid of the current Conservative government he suggests (and who doesn't these days, even the Tories?) then the only option is to vote Labour, albeit unenthusiastically. This lukewarm endorsement of Sir Keir Starmer's Labour leadership may be damning with faint praise but I guess Starmer will just have to suck it up. Cold comfort Lynch's further announcement that, as an unaffiliated union, the RMT will be supporting Jeremy Corbyn if (surely when) he stands as an Independent candidate in Islington North will be significantly less welcome, however, as will his pledge to support socialist candidates wherever they stand. Labour still prides itself on being a broad church, despite the evidence that, under Starmer, it has become a narrow sect. But it will maintain the fiction to get through the election. And

Poor Mr Speaker Hoyle has become the latest victim of the curse of Starmer. Wednesday's fiasco of an Opposition Day debate in the House of Commons was sparked by Labour Leader, Sir Keir Starmer's maladroit attempt to nobble the Speaker of the House by turning up unexpectedly at a pre-scheduled meeting with a party colleague in order to 'persuade' Sir Lindsay to call a Labour motion on an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza first. Under the arcane procedures of the House of Commons, Opposition parties have twenty opportunities in a Parliamentary sitting to control the Order Paper, in other words set the agenda for debate. In the effectively two-party set-up that existed prior to the rise of the Scottish National Party (SNP) this meant Labour had plenty of scope to challenge the government - and for challenge read embarrass, the point of an Opposition Day Motion being to show the government in the worst possible light. On this occasion that opportunity fell to the SN

An avowed republican I may be but news of King Charles III's cancer diagnosis is nevertheless a cause of sadness - I might not want him, or anyone else, as my king but I wish the man no harm.  However, Jonathan Swift's opinion that "health is the greatest of all possessions; a pale cobbler is better than a sick king" serves as a timely reminder that ill-health in the monarch is not simply a personal matter, it has constitutional implications. To be blunt about it, Charles' death, in constitutional terms at least, would be no great problem; the king is dead, long live the king. The succession is assured and the crown would pass immediately to the Prince of Wales, who would be pronounced William V. The ship of state would sail on. A long-term or debilitating illness, on the other hand, could have far-reaching consequences for the institution of the monarchy at a sensitive time, coming so soon after the death of Britain's longest-reigning monarch, Charles' mo

Saints above! One of the small pleasures of being in a Catholic country is checking the calendar each morning to see whose saints day it is. They often come in pairs and today it's the turn of Agatha and Alice. Saint Agatha of Sicily was a virgin martyred during the era of the Roman persecution of Christians. Alice, aka Adelaide of Guelders (don't ask), was a pious medieval royal who features on three dates in the year, two as Alice and one as Empress Adelaide. This might seem a trifle greedy for a saint but, then, she was a rather grand one. Tomorrow it's Saints Dorothea and Paul Miki. I can't wait. Hug a hoodie At least David (now Lord) Cameron got one thing right in his political career. Although he never actually used the phrase which has dogged him ever since his 2006 speech in which he called for more tolerance and understanding of demonised youth, the sub-editorial shorthand stuck. For me, though, it's the garment I've embraced. Aged seventy-one I've

The benign climate in the Canary Islands is both a blessing and a curse - a blessing because it attracts international tourism year-round, and a curse for exactly the same reason. To quote today's Canarian Weekly, an English language newssite: "Cumulatively, from January to December of 2023, a remarkable 13,942,965 tourists explored the Canary Islands, indicating a commendable 13.1% increase, leaving behind an economic footprint of 20.3 billion euros, reflecting an increase of 16.51%." The fact that Canarian Weekly considers a 13.1% increase in visitor numbers "commendable" tells one a lot about its editorial position vis-a-vis tourism: tourists = income, income = public good. This is a very simplistic, one-dimensional, self-serving analysis, which takes into account only the gross financial contribution of tourism to the islands' economy and fails to factor in its costs in terms of environmental and social harms. The nett result of mass tourism on the archi