DIARY
r Terence Wheldon, the solicitor
dealing with Philip Larkin's estate, says that his diaries were burnt shortly after his death but that he will proceed 'at a leisurely pace with the remainder of the instructions'. These were that 'all unpub- lished writings . . . in any form . . . should be destroyed unread'. Mr Wheldon's wise delay gives time for pressure to mount for saving the modest poet's literary remains even though it is against his wishes. To take an extreme case, would anyone take seriously the author's instruction to destroy unpublished a newly discovered work by Jane Austen? Anyway, I assume the re- quest for oblivion does not apply to corres- pondence I had with Philip Larkin early last year. 1 had asked him what happened to John Kemp, the working-class hero crucified by what would now be known as Sloane Ranger tykes in Larkin's marvel- lous Oxford novel, Jill. 'I think it very likely that Whitbread would have gone to the. Dean (wearing his gown, of course) and said that Kemp was "in with a real bad set" and it was "damaging his work". As John was a scholar, the Dean would pay some attention to this, and would probably arrange for him to share rooms with Whitbread himself, which would bring him back to the normal path from which he should never have diverged. As for his later life . . . I doubt if he had quite the Personality to become a school teacher. Perhaps a librarian? It may interest you to know that John's original "distracting in- fluence" was a University dance band the Bandits, as they were called, and several of whom I knew. The idea was that John would know how to play the comet, having been taught by a Salvation Army father, but would fall for jazz: however, I gave up this idea because I really didn't know enough about music, or the Bandits, and the imaginary sister theme seemed easier.'
It used to be called the Silly Season because Parliament rose early in the sum- mer and there were no serious stories for the press. Now that Parliament drones on to the end of July or the beginning of August the Commons and the media unite in creating tosh. Unimpeachable sources tell the Sunday Times that the Queen believes Mrs Thatcher should be more caring, was worried about her conduct of the miners' strike, had misgivings about the Libyan air raid and disapproves of Mrs Thatcher's approach to sanctions on South Africa. Other unimpeachable sources say the story is total rubbish as indicated by the Sharp and prompt denials from the Palace. is unchivalrous to make mischief for two ladies wt_ _no ,
because of their positions, are
WOODROW WYATT
unable publicly to discuss their closely confidential relationship and have to suffer silly travesties of it. But, after all, it has been unusually hot lately.
Mr Ken Gill is general secretary of Tass which has a membership of around 200,000. He is this year's chairman of the TUC General Council and will preside over its annual conference in September. He is a Communist of the Morning Star variety. The BBC give him air time to demand sanctions and one man, one vote for South Africa. At the last conference of his union, 28 April-2 May, a decision was taken to disregard the rules about election of union executives in the Trade Union Act 1984 because Mr Gill and his Marxist- oriented executive do not believe in one man, one vote for their union members. They practise a system of one branch, one vote which is delivered at area council meetings. How a branch votes is decided by those usually very left-wing activists who bother to turn up at meetings. What Mr Gill wants for blacks is too good for whites. One of the defects of the Trade Union Act 1984 comes from the failure of the Tories to understand the nature of union life. There should have been com- pulsory secret postal ballots from the start. Even the alternative, the unsatisfactory workplace ballot, can only be activated upon a member's complaint to the Certi- fication Officer that the Act is not being complied with. So far no Tass member has dared to run the victimisation gauntlet by going to the Certification Officer, which he ought not to have to do; however, I hear there may he something rumbling in this respect. Mr Gill naturally does not want a
`Talk big, Geoffrey, but carry a soft stick.' democratic election in his union because it would produce a new executive which would not appoint him to a seat on the General Council of the TUC and gone would be his glory. A complainant, if his union persists in denying proper elections, has to face a court action. What kind of a world do the Tories live in if they imagine that the general run of ordinary union members are prepared to go through this ordeal to enforce what should automatical- ly be theirs?
Engaging, talented Bob Boothby's obsession with Churchill grew with the years. After I had written a review in 1984 in which I mentioned Noel Coward's con- tempt for Churchill, Bob Boothby wrote me that it was largely because he knew `how atrociously Winston behaved to me in 1940 and 1941, and also the reason. It was because . . I was the only one who stood
up to him . , He was a horrible man.' But the reason for the break with Churchill was glossed over in the obituaries. As a wartime MP, Boothby had an arrangement by which he got a percentage of Czech assets frozen in London released to the claimants and did not declare his interest when pursuing the matter in Parliament. When information came to the government about this, Boothby was interviewed pri- vately and given a chance to explain. His refusal to admit the truth led to his public exposure after a humiliating inquiry. The very least that the sorrowing Churchill could do, when many thought Boothby should be expelled from the House, was to sack him from the Ministry of Food where he had become a junior minister, and it would have been impossible for Churchill to reinstate him in 1951. It was a tragedy, but not of Churchill's making.
driver at the Tote went to his doctor complaining of a pain. The same morning he was sent to the Hammersmith Hospital for further examination and a hernia op- eration was prescribed. Within four days he was allotted a bed at the hospital and had the operation, though such operations are not regarded as emergencies. Three days after the operation he went home and was told the district nurse would call on him in ten days to take his stitches out. This doesn't sound much like the delays and poor service in the National Health Service which I read about; he could not have got better service if he'd been a top-rated Bupa member. I believe that most long waiting lists are due to the inefficiency of hospital administrations which do not plan the use of their beds with the necessary skill.
Previous page
