Repeat that to yourself the next time the bins aren’t collected or you’ve waited three hour in Our Patients.
For all that it is never wise for a prime minister to launch attacks on entire groups of people (otherwise known as voters), especially not when he has styled himself the leader of the People’s Party. The second Mr Blair has been operational this week, departing from his set speech to a City audience to denounce “people in the public sector” as being “more rooted to the concept that `it has always been done this way’ than any other group of people I have come across”. The other is the Spartan son of Thatcher who takes no prisoners and lashes out at ingrates in his way. One is the kindly shepherd of the Third Way, a reasonable sort of guy who just wants us all to graze peaceably together in the moderate, sunlit uplands of New Britain.

A properly focused inquiry might also help us to understand to what extent it was the air bombing that forced Milosevic to capitulate, rather than, say, the eventual threat to use ground troops. These are legitimate questions, raised not least by The Independent’s correspondent Robert Fisk. They should be answered swiftly and publicly, and not just for the benefit of an opportunist politician on the make.. AS WE now know, there are two Tony Blairs. And, most significantly of all, why Nato not only decided against committing ground troops, but made that decision public. But that is not so vital as finding out why our aircraft were unable to distinguish between crude wooden decoys and real Yugoslavian army tanks in the first place Or why we bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.

Mr Duncan Smith says that “the key here is to look at what politicians said and what the outcomes were in terms of what targets were set by politicians”. That may be “key” for Mr Duncan Smith, but it is an unpromising way to get to the bottom of some of the undoubted mistakes of the campaign.
Nato’s politicians may have exaggerated the extent to which we were successful in hitting Yugoslavian heavy artillery on the ground in Kosovo. Perhaps they had poor intelligence about what was really going on. THE CONSERVATIVE Party’s call for an inquiry into Nato’s bombing of Yugoslavia is one of the more ingenious bits of political mischief to have come from that source lately. Ingenious, that is, because it exploits the reasonable proposition that lessons can and should be learnt about the conduct of all military campaigns, even successful ones, and that it is sensible to review strategy and tactics. However, Iain Duncan Smith, the Tory defence spokesman, is being mischievous by exploiting this in the way most likely to yield a dividend for his party and rub the gloss off Tony Blair’s reputation for strong leadership.

Mr Dobson, having banned the attachment of conditions to organ donations, should move swiftly to instigate the “opt-out” system, thereby curing the cause of this particular problem, as well as the symptoms.. We hope they support such a move, for this is the true solution to the shortage of organs, one which will ensure no more hospitals or doctors are caught in the dilemma that faced the Northern General. It is timely that the medical profession will today, at the BMA conference in Belfast, debate whether an “opt-out” scheme should be introduced to this country. But in some countries in continental Europe people are assumed to be organ donors unless they have “opted-out”, freeing up a large number of organs. One of the main reasons behind the shortage of organ donors is the lack of donor cards carried.