Following much speculation an extract of the Attorney General Lord Goldsmith's legal advice to the Prime Minister on March 7th 2003 concerning the legality of the war has been leaked to Channel Four. Tony Blair has previously refused all demands to publish the advice, leading to much suspicion that Goldsmith's confidential advice questioned the legality of the war. This secret advice was not even shown to other cabinet members at the time.

In the leaked extract Lord Goldsmith can only be described as definitively nailing his colours to the fence. This is strange, considering that ten days later he presented an unequivocal case for the legality of the war to Parliament, stating that "authority to use force against Iraq exists from the combined effects of [UN] resolutions 678, 687 and 1441.”.

The leaked statement is as follows. I have emphasised in bold the key statements as I see them. The non-italicised inserts are my comments:-

26. To sum up, the language of resolution 1441 leaves the position unclear and the statements made on adoption of the resolution suggest that there were differences of view within the [UN Security] Council as to the legal effect of the resolution. Arguments can be made on both sides. A key question is whether there is in truth a need for an assessment of whether Iraq’s conduct constitutes a failure to take the final opportunity or has constituted a failure fully to cooperate within the meaning of OP4 [Operative Paragraph 4] such that the basis of the cease-fire is destroyed. If an assessment is needed of that situation, it would be for the Council to make it. A narrow textual reading of the resolution suggests that sort of assessment is not needed, because the Council has predetermined the issue. Public statements, on the other hand, say otherwise.

27. In these circumstances, I remain of the opinion that the safest legal course would be to secure the adoption of a further resolution to authorise the use of force.
[...]
The key point is that it should establish that the Council has concluded that Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity offered by resolution 1441, as in the draft which has already been tabled.

28. Nevertheless, having regard to the information on the negotiating history which I have been given and to the arguments of the US Administration which I heard in Washington, I accept that a reasonable case can be made that resolution 1441 is capable in principle of reviving the authorisation in 678 without a further resolution.

29. However, the argument that resolution 1441 alone has revived the authorisation to use force in resolution 678 will only be sustainable if there are strong factual grounds for concluding that Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity. In other words, we would need to be able to demonstrate hard evidence of non-compliance and non-cooperation. Given the structure of the resolution as a whole, the views of UNMOVIC and the IAEA will be highly significant in this respect. In the light of the latest reporting by UNMOVIC, you will need to consider very carefully whether the evidence of non-cooperation and non-compliance by Iraq is sufficiently compelling to justify the conclusion that Iraq has failed to take its final opportunity. [On the day that this advice was given Hans Blix reported to the UN that progress had made with the Iraqis, who were co-operating fully with the weapons inspectors]

30. In reaching my conclusion, I have taken account of the fact that on a number of previous occasions, including in relation to Operation Desert Fox in December 1998 and Kosovo in 1999, UK forces have participated in military action on the basis of advice from my predecessors that the legality of the action under international law was no more than reasonably arguable. But a “reasonable case” does not mean that if the matter ever came before a court I would be confident that the court would agree with the view.

I judge that, having regard to the arguments on both sides, and considering the resolution as a whole in the light of the statements made on adoption and subsequently, a court might well conclude that OPs 4 and 12 do require a further Council decision in order to revive the authorisation in resolution 678. But equally I consider that the counter view can be reasonably maintained. [That's cleared that up then...]

However, it must be recognised that on previous occasions when military action was taken on the basis of a reasonably arguable case, the degree of public and Parliamentary scrutiny of the legal issue was nothing as great as it is today.

31. The analysis set out above applies whether a second resolution fails to be adopted because of a lack of votes or because it is vetoed. As I have said before, I do not believe that there is any basis in law for arguing that there is an implied condition of reasonableness which can be read into the power of veto conferred on the permanent members of the Security Council by the UN Charter. So there are no grounds for arguing that an “unreasonable veto” would entitle us to proceed on the basis of a presumed Security Council authorisation. In any event, if the majority of world opinion remains opposed to military action, it is likely to be difficult on the facts to categorise a French veto as “unreasonable“[So that blows that particular excuse out of the water]. The legal analysis may, however, be affected by the course of events over the next week or so, eg, the discussions on the draft second resolution. If we fail to achieve the adoption of a second resolution we would need to consider urgently at that stage the strength of our legal case in the light of circumstances at the time.


The reason all this is important now is not so much to do with whether one agrees with the war or not, but whether one cares about Parliamentary probity. On the day of the Iraq war debate in Parliament there were serious doubts as to whether the motion would be passed. Many Labour MPs were convinced to vote in favour of the war on the back of promises from the Prime Minister that the case for war was not in doubt, both in terms of the evidence of a clear and present threat and in terms of its legality. Following exhaustive investigations it has been shown that the first claim was, if not based on lies, at least based on unreliable intelligence bolstered by government spin. Today's revelation now indicates that MP's would appear to have been left in the dark on the legality issue as well. If the Attorney General's doubts had been in the public domain at this time it is very likely that the motion in favour of the war would not have been passed. This would most likely have led to Tony Blair's resignation and thrown the whole issue of the war into question.

Is it coincidence that today the Conservatives have started their "Tony Blair lied about the War" poster campaign today? Is it coincidence that the Charles Kennedy has said today that he wouldn't use the word "Liar", but instead demanded the publication of the Attorney General's advice in order to clear the matter up? If so, it's a very handy coincidence for the opposition parties. The big question now is how many people care enough to change the way they'll vote. There could be some life in this election campaign yet.

My wife flies in from Canada this evening. I just checked the ETA of the flight and found that it is due in from Toronto YYZ at 2112. If you're a Rush fan, you'll see understand the importance of these signals for those who fly by night. If not, I imagine you're wondering what I'm going on about.

A thread started recently on Monkey Filter regarding everyday handy household tips. The large number of posts include invaluable wisdom on all manner of subjects including avoiding speeding tickets, finding your way out of swamps, efficient urination techniques for men and how to get the stains out of just about anything you can think of.

I was particularly pleased to see among the comments a link to a list of Viz Top Tips. Viz was a British magazine which became very popular in the late eighties/ early nineties with its mixture of foul-mouthed versions of kids' comic strips and lampoons of the tabloid press. The Top Tips section was always one of the highlights for me. Below is a selection of some of my favourites:

Save money on expensive personalised car number plates by simply changing your name to match your existing plate. - Mr. KVL 741Y

Don't waste money buying expensive binoculars. Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view.

Hijackers. Avoid a long stressful siege and the risk of arrest, imprisonment or death by simply making sure you book a flight to your intended destination in the first place.

Deter goldfish from having sex by throwing a small bucket of air over any that you catch in the act.

An empty aluminium cigar tube filled with angry wasps makes an inexpensive vibrator.

Smokers. Save on matches and lighters, by simply lighting your next fag from the butt of your last one.

Vegetarians coming to dinner? Simply serve them a nice bit of steak or veal. Since they`re always going on about how tofu, Quorn, meat substitute etc `tastes exactly like the real thing`, they won`t know any difference.

FOOL other drivers into thinking you have an expensive car phone by holding an old TV or video remote control up to your ear and occasionally swerving across the road and mounting the kerb.

DRILL a one inch diameter hole in your refrigerator door. This will allow you to check that the light goes off when the door is closed.

SAVE electricity by turning off all the lights in your house and walking around wearing a miner's hat.

HOUSEWIVES. I find the best way to get two bottles of washing-up liquid for the price of one is by putting one in your shopping trolley and the other in your coat pocket.

OLD telephone directories make ideal personal address books. Simply cross out the names and address of people you don't know.

Pretend you're an airline pilot by wedging your accelerator pedal down with a heavy book, securing the steering wheel with some old rope, and then strolling back along the bus chatting casually to the passengers.

LOSE weight quickly by eating raw pork or rancid tuna. I found that the subsequent food poisoning/diarrhea enabled me to lose 12 pounds in only 2 days.

WHEN throwing someone a sharp instrument such as a Stanley knife, or bread knife, always throw it blade first as they invariably tend to turn whilst in the air.

SMELL gas? Locate the suspected leak by striking an ordinary match in every room in the house until a loud explosion reveals the source of the escaping gas.

TAXI drivers. Why not pop into the garage and ask them to fix your indicators lights for you so that other motorists know where the heck you're going.

TAKE your dustbin to the supermarket with you so that you can see which items you have recently run out of.

MAKE shopkeepers feel like criminals and con men by carefully checking their change and holding bank notes up to the light before accepting them.

EXPENSIVE hair gels are a con. Marmalade is a much cheaper alternative, but beware of bees in the summer.

Bearded men can obtain the appearance of an upper class Arctic explorer by simply applying Tippex to their beards, painting their noses blue, and cutting off a couple of toes. It never fails to impress the girls.

Give up smoking by sticking one cigarette from each new pack up a fat friend's arse, filter first, then replacing it in the box. The possibility of putting that one in your mouth will put you off smoking any of them.

If a small child is choking on an ice cube, don't panic. Simply pour a jug of boiling water down its throat and hey presto! The blockage is almost instantly removed.

Make people think you have an expensive car phone by calling them, asking them to repeat everything they say and then hanging up half way through their reply.

Keep the seat next to you on the train vacant by smiling and nodding at people as they walk up the aisle.

International master criminals. Tell your guards to shoot James Bond in the head at the first opportunity. Under no circumstances give him a guided tour of your base, or leave him in the custody of attractive women in bikinis.

PEOPLE whose surname is Toblerone should always take along an empty 'Toblerone' chocolate box when attending interviews for office jobs. This would save your potential employer the expense of having to make a name plaque for your desk, and therefore increase your chances of getting the job.

I wonder if anyone else was as puzzled as I was by the fact that the contents of a Japanese textbook could cause such offence to the Chinese as to lead to a major diplomatic incident and much civil unrest in China including attacks on Japanese citizens and property.

China's rapid growth is rapidly threatening Japan's economic hegemony in the region and I came to the conclusion that this was another example of the recent political power games, such as the objection to Japan becoming a member of the UN Security Council and the passing of the anti-secession law against Taiwanese independence. Although I am sure there is more than an element of political exploitation of the issue by the Chinese government, a little historical research caused me to understand the Chinese side of the story a little better.

The Sino-Japanese War (1937-45) resulted in the deaths of over 20 million Chinese, the vast majority of whom were non-combatants. The Japanese imperial military philosophy of the time taught troops to value human life very cheaply - their own lives were expendable to protect the glory of the Emperor, and Chinese lives were in relation as good as worthless.

This attitude led to numerous atrocities in the war, culminating in The Rape of Nanjing. Following a bitter campaign to win Shanghai, the troops (many of whom were reservists) were expecting to return home to their families. Instead they were ordered to take Nanjing. By the time they reached the city, the beleaguered forces of Chiang Kai-Shek had already largely moved out, and the Japanese forces were able to walk in.

In the following six weeks of December 1937 and January 1938 an estimated 250,000 Chinese were slaughtered, many in horrific ways. Tens of thousands of women were raped. There are reports of people being flayed alive, babies being thrown in the air and caught on bayonets, pregnant women bayoneted through their stomachs, the list goes on. Many victims were ritually beheaded, and contemporary reports mention that a number of soldiers were left physically exhausted by the number of beheadings they had carried out. Western observers reported on the nonchalance of the soldiers as they massacred Chinese civilians at will (real audio interview with Iris Chang, author of The Rape on Nanking).



Under the right circumstances and social conditioning such actions are unfortunately familiar. Eyewitness reports from Berlin in 1945, Rwanda and Srebrenica to give just three examples have many sickening similarities.

There has been much debate in Japan over the veracity of the death toll and the details of the atrocities, but most independent historians are convinced of the extent of the massacre. Nationalist right-wing politicians and activists however have continued to try to push their revisionist histories into the mainstream, infiltrating the Society for the Creation of New Textbooks which was the source of the books which have caused the recent controversy. In Japan all textbooks have to be approved by the Ministry of Education, who made many changes to the books in question but not enough to prevent the ire of the Chinese.

In defence of the Japanese, the textbook has only been taken up by less than 1 in 2500 schools in Japan, but it is the way the issue has been handled by the politicians which has caused the issue to spiral out of control. In spite of Koizumi's efforts at damage limitation, nationalists have stepped up to the plate to downplay the massacre and other atrocities, and government ministers have symbolically visited the Yasukuni shrine - a controversial site which honours the war dead, including known war criminals, in the context of a justification of Japan's imperial past.

If Germany started printing textbooks downplaying the Holocaust there would quite rightly be uproar in Europe and the US. Japan's approach should therefore not be to try to justify the act, and should instead be to apologise unreservedly for approving the textbooks in question. A better face-saving approach may be to push for a review of both Japanese and Chinese textbooks by a panel of representatives from both countries. I am sure that there are at least as many misrepresentations of Japan in Chinese textbooks. Measures need to be taken to remove the heat from the situation, not intensify it. Such steps forward can only come from better mutual understanding, starting at school level.

Andrew Sullivan came up with an analogy for a non-Catholic acquaintance to describe what the appointment of Joseph Ratzinger meant to many heterodox Catholics:-

This is the religious equivalent of having had four terms of George W. Bush only to find that his successor as president is Karl Rove.

I suppose a more apposite UK analogy would be Tony Blair being succeeded after 3 terms by that infamous architect and enforcer of New Labour orthodoxy Peter Mandelson. Heaven (or at least Gordon Brown) forbid...

On the subject of the election, I was impressed by Tony Blair's interview with the dreaded Jeremy Paxman today, particularly in comparison with the stuffing Paxo dealt out to Charles Kennedy on Monday. I can hardly wait for the Michael Howard interview on Friday. Will we see a repeat of the 1997 classic, in which Paxman asked Howard the same question 12 times without getting an answer? Based on his tenacity with Blair on the subject of failed asylum seekers, and his merciless bullying of Charles Kennedy, it wouldn't surprise me.

Paxman's techniques may often whiff of egotism and showboating, and often ending up generating far more heat than light, but you can't knock the entertainment value.

What happens when you pack the parliament of traditionally male dominated society like Iraq with a high proportion of women? As the New York Times reports, the results are not necessarily as one may predict.

Holding over 30 per cent of the seats, the female representatives clearly see the opportunity to have their say in the issue of the future role of women in Iraqi society. However, not all the women see eye-to-eye on what the nature of that role should be:-

One morning last week, three dozen women in Western-style business suits crowded into the office of the man who would soon be Iraq's prime minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari. Most were members of the newly elected National Assembly, and they had a list of demands.

They wanted women to run at least 10 of Iraq's 30-odd government ministries. They wanted the number of places reserved for women on party slates raised to 40 percent in future elections. Most of all, they wanted a promise of respect for women's rights.

Hours later, another group of women who are assembly members arrived in Dr. Jaafari's office. They wore black abayas, the garments that cover a woman's body from head to foot, and they had another agenda. They wanted to put aspects of Islamic law into Iraq's legal code - including provisions that would allow men as many as four wives and reduce the amount of money allotted to women in inheritances.

To put things into context, more than 90 per cent of the women in the Iraqi parliament wear some kind of head-covering with around half of them wearing the full black abaya. Many of them are devoutly religious and see this as an opportunity for them to participate in creating a regime based more closely on strict Islamic Shariah law than strict equality for women.



And what's wrong with that? Surely the important issue here is that they are in a position to express their opinions and have an influence on democracy. Provided that the integrity of the democratic process is maintained (and I don't get the impression that anyone on any side is arguing for women losing the vote under the proposed constitution) they will stand or fall on how their policies are perceived by the Iraqi electorate, an electorate which after so many years of war has a significant majority of women. My personal preference would be for more freedom and equality for women in Iraq, but my vote quite rightly doesn't count there. Those who think they have a right to influence women's rights in Iraq should perhaps start by looking in their own back yard first.

Figures from the Inter Parliamentary Union show the percentage of women in each of the worlds' parliaments. With 87 women out of 275 seats (31.6%), Iraq has the 14th largest proportion of women in its parliament in the world. The reasons for this high percntage are of course somewhat artificial - the proportion was pre-determined by Iraq's electoral commission under the significant influence of the Coalition.

Given this commitment to ensuring a fair proportion of women in the Iraqi democratic process, is it not somewhat hypocritical to see the USA languishing in 59th place in the table with only 15% representation by women, and even the UK in 49th position (18.1%)? There are, of course, many reasons for this, but I can think of none which should not apply equally to our democracies as they do to Iraq.

Our leaders smugly make excuses, not wishing to tinker with our well established traditional democracy, assuring us that our societal biases will eventually take care of themselves. However, when the oldest and most powerful democracies in the world find themselves mired in scandals while those they look down upon show themselves to be far more representative of their electorate, maybe it's time for a bit of humility, to learn some lessons from other parts of the world, and perhaps to taste some of the medicine we are willing to force feed to other nations but find unpalatable ourselves.

MG Rover have gone into receivership. For once, this post strikes very close to home for me, as the company I work for is an MG Rover supplier.

This afternoon we received an urgent communication from one of the major Rover sub-suppliers informing us that they were suspending all parts deliveries and asking for urgent clarification of our stock and orders. It soon became clear that something serious was afoot. It became clear very soon that all major suppliers were refusing to deliver with immediate effect unless outstanding debts were settled.

We contacted MG Rover directly to clarify the situation. The story we were told was that one particular manufacturer had failed to deliver in the morning due to a confusion over payment. This had caused a stoppage which was leaked to the media and misconstrued as something bigger. Other suppliers had got wind of the story and had run scared. We were informed that MG Rover would recommence production at 07:30 Monday morning. It now seems more likely that the company were trying to buy time before officially announcing the move into receivership.

Tonight there are bizarre reports that the Government's announcement that Rover was in the hands of the receivers came in advance of MG Rover's directors actually going down that line. Given the fact that it is illegal to knowingly continue operating an insolvent company, if true this development could put Rover's directors in a great deal of trouble, as well as causing plenty of potential embarrassment to the government during an election campaign.

MG Rover were seeking a tie-up with Shanghai Automotive Corporation which would have provided a desperately needed cash injection. In the end they found themselves in a classic chicken-egg situation. The government offered a bridging loan if the deal could be secured. Shanghai Automotive Corporation would not commit to a deal without a loan in place. In the end, it seems likely that the government would not able to sweeten the deal to a sufficient degree due to European competition laws.

As it stands it is likely that our company will lose a significant sum of money, but we are the lucky ones. My overwhelming emotion is sympathy for the 6,000 workers at Rover who will lose their jobs and the countless others working for less fortunate manufacturers who will lose their livelihoods as a result.

With MG Rover out of the picture, there is not British owned manufacturer left producing more than around 1,000 vehicles per year. It is no exaggeration, therefore, to say that the British motor industry has died today.

UPDATE at 23:40: MG Rover have just announced that in spite of the government's announcement they have not officially put the company into receivership! This is going to get very, very messy!

I have a confession to make. I have an embarrassing problem that I am hoping someone out there can help me with. Maybe it's better if I just come out and say it...

I just don't get what all the fuss is about Flickr!

Everywhere I go on the internet I see this service hailed as a revolution, the next big thing. This culminated in an article I recently read in the Guardian by Ben Hammersley in which he referred to Flickr as "...perhaps the smartest and richest online application ever written". That was enough for me. I need someone out there to share the good news with me.

Here's what I do understand. Flickr enables its users to tag and attach comments to images which are posted online. I can see that this provides a neat way around the difficulties of searching for pixellated images which would not otherwise have any relevant search keywords associated with them.

But so far, so good, so what? Such tags surely aren't in themselves the killer app. Technorati promotes them for blog posts, and del.ici.ous does the same for link-sharing. Both these applications for meta-tagging would appear to me to have more potential usefulness than image sharing. The reason I say this is that I don't see the revolutionary potential behind millions of people searching through each other's holiday snaps. I can see it may be fun for a while for some people, but I can't see that it's going to change the way millions of people think about and do everyday things in the same way that, say, Ebay did.

I have read some ambiguous quotes hinting that the real revolution of Flickr is about much more that photo sharing, but if so I just can't grasp what it is, and I haven't found anyone yet who can clearly explain it to me. If you can find it in your heart, I'd be grateful if you could let me in on the big idea.

To relieve the sombre mood in the wake of the Pope's death at the weekend I thought I'd recount my favourite Pope joke, which is amazingly neither rude nor blasphemous . Stop reading if you've heard it before.

The story begins with the Pope flying into Britain for a bit of ecumenical schmoozing with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Unfortunately for his Holiness, a stickler for punctuality, the flight is delayed so he has scarcely a few moments for a bit of perfunctory tarmac-kissing before rushing through immigration to meet his driver.

Without delay he gets in the back of the car and tells the driver to put his foot down. To the Pontiff's dismay, however, the driver settles into the slow lane on the motorway, going no more than 30mph.

"What in the Lord's name are you doing?", asks his Holiness."My Popemobile goes faster than this. Get a move on!"

The driver speeds up to 40mph but refuses to go any faster. Suddenly the Pope shouts out, "That's it! You've exhausted the patience of a future saint. Pull over and I'll drive."

No sooner has the driver stopped at the side of the road than the Pope bundles him into the back of the car and settles himself into the driving seat. The car screeches off in a puff of dust and is soon doing over 100mph in the outside lane.

All is going well until the Pontiff notices the blue lights of a police car in his rear view mirror. With a few words of choice Latin he pulls over to the side of the road. As the policeman walks up to the vehicle the Pope rolls down the window, puts on his best Papal smile and says to the copper, "Do you know who I am?"

The policeman blushes slightly and says, "Wait there one moment, Sir. I'll be right back".

Returning rather nervously to his vehicle he gets on the radio to his superintendent.

"Sorry to trouble you sir, but I've just pulled over someone for speeding and I need some advice", he says.

"What do you mean? Just book him and send him on his way", answers the superintendent.

"The problem is that he's a very important person and I don't know if I should" replies the officer.

"Well if it's Tony Blair, make sure you throw the book at him!" grumbles the superintendent.

"No," replies the officer. "It's someone even more important than Tony Blair."

"More important than Tony Blair? Don't tell me it's George Bush!"

"No, sir," the officer says. "Even more important than that"

"Come off it!" shouts the superintendent. "Who's more important than George Bush?"

"Well let's put it this way," replies the officer. "Whoever it is, the Pope's working as his chauffeur!"

Pope John Paul II has died.

It would be hypocritical of me to unreservedly acclaim his achievements as Pope. His stance on women, homosexuals and active sexuality in the priesthood (unless it involves children) has missed an opportunity, I feel, to increase the relevance and respect for the Catholic church in the modern era. In addition, the lack of flexibility regarding contraception has condemned to death countless victims of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa, the very region where Catholicism is growing most rapidly.

Having said all this, one can only admire the enthusiasm and energy with which he has spread his doctrine, and the Christian virtue he has exemplified in the way in which he conducted his life.

During his Papacy, he visited no less than 130 countries, a mission which was undoubtedly highly instrumental in the 40% increase in the Catholic global congregation. However, in the same period the numbers of practicing Catholics and priests in Europe has collapsed dramatically. In France for example, half of the current priesthood is expected to die within the next eight years, while only 150 priests completed their training as priests last year in the whole country. As older European priests die, many now have to be replaced by African or Asian pastors due to the insufficient numbers of young people entering the priesthood. It would seem that the future of Rome lies firmly in the developing regions of the world.

For me, however, perhaps the greatest memory I have of the Pope is the Christian compassion with which he treated his would-be assassin Mehmet Ali Agca. Even as the bullets took him down, the Pope made the sign of the cross in the direction of his would-be assassin. Upon his recovery, he visited Agca in prison to forgive him.



In contrast with so many of the activities of the American Christian Right, I can at least clearly identify the actions of the late Pope with the morality of the New Testament - a morality which is, as I understand it, centred around forgiveness, tolerance and understanding rather than bigotry, fear and revenge. In a world where the majority of peace-loving people are caught in the crossfire between two fundamentalist religious factions hellbent on inflicting violence on each other, a little more of such religious forgiveness, tolerance and understanding would surely not go amiss.

I have to admit to being momentarily caught on the hop by yesterdays April Fools joke on The Today Programme(Real Audio link) on BBC Radio 4.

The piece "revealed" that constitutionalists had discovered an obscure rule of succession which had been subsumed into the British legal system upon Queen Victoria's marriage to Prince Albert of the German Saxe-Coburg family. According to the Saxe-Coburg rule, in the event of the remarriage of a sovereign (or sovereign-to-be), the eldest of the offspring of either partner would become the next in line to the throne. As such, Tom Parker-Bowles, who is older than Princes William and Harry, would become second in line to the throne.

It all sounded so plausible to me, especially given the great number of unforeseen legal and constitution problems which have already dogged the wedding plans. First the announced venue of Windsor Castle was found to be unsuitable due to the fact that it's declaration as a place of marriage registration would allow the world and his wife-to-be to have the right to marry there. Then there was the Queen/Princess/Princess Consort Camilla, Princess of Wales/Duchess of Cornwall (delete as applicable, or just choose what you fancy) debacle. Given what had already transpired, it didn't seem at all implausible to me that another constitutional brick had been dropped. It was only when I realised the date that the penny dropped for me. Definitely the best hoax on the Today Programme since the demise of Andrew Gilligan.

Also on the April Fools theme, the New York Times yesterday told the real story of Joe Berton, the model for Sidd Finch, who was the fictional subject of a celebrated April Fools article written by George Plimpton in Sports Illustrated in 1985. According to the story, Hayden Finch was a Harvard dropout who went to Tibet seeking enlightenment and learnt along the way how to fling a baseball with pin-point accuracy at 168mph. Having changed his name to Sidd (short for Siddharta, loosely translated as 'aim attained', or perhaps 'perfect pitch'!), he returned to the US and was scouted by the New York Mets. Great numbers of baseball fans fell for Plimpton's deviously crafted story, including several major league General Managers who immediately lodged complaints of unfair competition with the Commissioner of Major League Baseball. The article was never announced as an April Fools gag. Instead, Plimpton followed up the story with an statement the following week that Finch had announced on April 1st that he had decided not to pursue a career in baseball after all, claiming that his accuracy had deserted him. "The Perfect Pitch is now an instrument of Chaos and Cruelty", he was alleged to have stated.

Joe Berton was a friend of Lane Stewart, the photographer tasked with taking the shots to accompany Plimpton's article. Berton's 6'4" gangly frame would make him ideal to pose for the pictures, thought Stewart. Although Berton thought no more about it, the article received such notoriety that he is still to this day recognised in the street as the mythical Sidd Finch.

I can't finish on this subject without mentioning what must be the most celebrated British April Fool. In 1957, the Panorama programme featured an article on the Swiss spaghetti harvest. The serious nature of the piece and its attention to detail convinced a large number of gullible Brits, sufficiently unfamiliar with foreign food at that time, that spaghetti did indeed grow on trees. Garden centres were inundated with enquiries on whether it was possible to get trees which would produce spaghetti in their own gardens (Real video clip here).