There is currently something of a debate about childbirth and the relative merits of having it at home or in hospital.

Some years ago there was a campaign to popularise having the birth in hospital. One of the posters at that time emphasised that the first three minutes of childbirth are the most dangerous of life.

Someone added to the poster that the last three minutes were a bit dodgy too.

The division of the Home Office into two parts is the sort of simplistic solution beloved of politicians and bureaucrats. In itself it will achieve nothing, zilch, Nada.

If for instance we wish to improve security we need to further increase the resources for the security services and ensure they are properly supervised and not by a comfortable committee of the so called 'Great and the Good'. Whether the Security Services report to the new Department to be run by Mr Reid or to Mr Reid in his present guise is immaterial totally. Ministers and bureaucrats do not provide the safety we desire. Those working in the Security Services do whoever is their political master.

Have we seen this week the beginning of the end for Gordon Brown's attempt to be the next Prime Minister? The flashy Budget Speech has clearly backfired. It was the sort of silly presentation that one would have expected from Mandelson and one criticises Brown's judgement (again) on such a silly attempt to strengthen his image. It assumed that every one else was stupid and would not see through the subterfuge. But probably of more damage is the film sequence, now on a lot of webs, of him picking his nose in public. When things start to go wrong things start to go wrong.

Against this background we have the developing Iran crisis and do not forget that the recent Lebanon/Israeli conflagration started with the capture of two Israeli soldiers. Clearly Mr Blair regrets his commitment to resign sometime soon and a fully blown up crisis could give him the opportunity to say that it would be irresponsible of him to resign at a time of crisis for the country. Stranger things have happened!

Writing to The Times is an ego trip satisfied when they publish. Like many I tend to rant and get things of my chest by the mere act of writing. There is no real expectation that amongst the many letters they receive they will publish mine. They used to do so over the last twenty years but I had assumed that they were no longer interested in my wisdom (?) and I was therefore surprised when they published my views on public schools and education.

The thrust of what I wanted to say was my immediately previous blog which was improved by a little sub-editing and appeared in the edition of 9 March alongside one from a Headmaster.

The point I was trying to make, I suppose, was that the politics of envy contributes nothing while the politics of aspiration just might.

Most governments show signs of madness in their final days and the Blair government is no exception. The attack on the public schools and the abolition of their charitable status is yet another example of insanity both politically and financially.

The proposal is no vote winner amongst those who support is essential in future elections. In addition the consequence of abolishing the charitable status of public schools will be to put up the cost of public schooling. This will make it available only to the more serious rich, force some parents to return to state education for their children at considerable cost to the taxpayer and exacerbate the problem of large class sizes.

If the Blair Government had been seriously interested in improving the quality of state education they should not be vindictive towards public schooling but instead make the state schools comparable to public schools. They could over the last ten years have improved the salaries and status of teachers, stopped interfering in the ability of teachers to teach and Headmasters providing a disciplined environment. In addition they could have ensured that class sizes were reduced by at least a half to bring state schools into line with the best of public schools and provided additional decent playing fields.

If they had done these things there would be no necessity in most cases for parents to send their children to public schools.

The debate about reform of the House of Lords may come to a conclusion this week. Or there again it may not.

It seems to me that democracy is a bit like virginity. Either you have it or you don't. The only way the Lords will attain credibility is if it is elected on a democratic basis, like all other second chambers in the developed world.

The call for a fully elected second chamber will not go away if yet again we fudge the issue.

i have just listened on Channel 4 to Lord Levy's Rabbi defending the good Lord. When any of us have to resort to our local Priest or whatever to go public in our defence creates more problems than it solves.

The problem with public figures is that they do not have a capabilty to say nothing.

Now that the Honours for Cash fiasco is developing it is clear that the public defence of Lord Levy comes from his own solicitors and not from No 10 Downing Street.

If the good Lord is left out to dry it will be interesting to see how he reacts.

It was my birthday yesterday and Maura treated me to lunch. We set out for a very nice Pub outside Winchester. On the way there we were about to pass Lainston House where Maura had dined frequently but as far as I can remember I had not eaten before. On a whim, not normally associated with those in their 73rd year, we aborted on the pub and went to the country hotel.

There are certain things in life that distinguish excellence and most of them were evident in this superb hotel. The set lunch was magnificent and I had a couple of glasses of the very drinkable House Cabernet. The service was friendly and first class without being unctuous.

A strong recommend to the many who enjoy the good things in life.

The future King continues to amaze me. He is the classic example of those who have an opinion about everything and a detailed knowledge of little.

I wonder how many times he has been in a McDonalds and how often he has eaten their new menu. That his opinions are probably not based on any personal evidence does not surprise.

That he has been conning the grocery buying public for a long time is another matter. He would be much better employed doing something about the overpriced and ordinary Royal Duchy grocery products to which he lends his name.

I often think how ridiculous middle aged and old men look when they wear wigs. They are only surpassed by people like the pseud and poser extraordinary Bernard Ingram who dye their hair. I suppose it reflects the search for eternal youth and a non acceptance of the inevitability in life of death and taxation.

It is generally better not to be mealy mouthed about important issues. We should not therefore disguise the fact that we are cutting and running from Iraq.

There is a sound argument that the least worst option is that both we and the United States should exit the scene. To the extent that we went in together it would have been more dignified and would have secured our important relationship with the United States if we had exited in tandem.

That we are both not on the same bicycle has more to do with Mr Blair's obsession with his legacy than the political and military requirements of the situation. The myth that we have built up the Iraqi capability and can now exit with honour should be identified and derided for the spin that it is.

The dog days of the Blair administration drag on. The man is clearly so like Mrs Thatcher in the dog days of her time that it is embarrassing to those of us who supported him in the early days. One can only continue to hope that in the interest of the country, its people and the Labour Party that he goes today.

I am due a rant. Increasingly politicians (It was Douglas Alexander this weekend) are heard to say that taking no action is not an option. The proposition is ridiculous - in many cases taking no action is often the least worst option in difficult situations. One only has to look back at the mass of legislation passed over recent years that have either made things worse or have the contrary effect to that intended.

There is an old adage that says 'if in doubt do nowt'.

I find it faintly encouraging, when watching the introductions to the England v. Spain game, that national football teams clearly do not know the words of their national anthems.

Many years ago someone said that nationalism was the last refuge of scoundrels. Whilst subscribing to that opinion it is good that the national teams, maybe unconsciously, are subscribing to that point of view.

We can still learn things from America.

The Washington Post has just recorded that Senate Democrats and Republicans broke a difficult stalemate last night and approved 96 to 2 expansive legislation to curtail the influence of lobbyists, tighten congressional ethics rules and prevent the spouses of senators from lobbying senators and their staffs.

We could perhaps consider following this example.

Mr Blair is right to call for a debate about the role the United Kingdom should play in the World. Whether the role he has been playing will be endorsed is another matter.

It is an obsession of Mr Blair and others who appear to believe that they have a unique and special role to play in the World and that we should "punch above our weight" in international affairs. It is this arrogance and the unwillingness to pursue our political objectives through multi-national organisations that has led in part to the debacle that is Iraq.

The empirical evidence is that there is no part of British life, with the possible exception of the BBC, where we can lay claim to being intrinsically better or more moral or intelligent than other nations whether it be in politic leadership, public services, architecture, sport or any other field of human activity. There is absolutely no evidence that somehow the United Kingdom is uniquely qualified to play a special role in the World. Neither do we have the economic strength to posture on the world stage as though it was still the days of Empire.

The problem is that whilst we continue to believe that somehow we are especially qualified to have the leadership role we dissipate our efforts to develop a decent and honest society in Britain from which lasting influence would emerge.

The debate when it is held will need to consider whether it is in our national interest to squander our resources in wars, independent nuclear deterrents and other follies de grandeur that arguably contribute nothing to the well-being or defence of our country.

There is alledgedly to be an announcement by Mr Bush later today that he will commit a further 20,000 troops to the debacle that is Iraq. This represents a fundemental change and is further evidence of his state of denial.

The change is that he will be doing something he has avoided since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 by ordering his top military brass to take action they initially resisted and advised against.

I like old adages. The one that seems to be the most apposite to the reaction of Mr Bush to the civil war in Iraq is 'When you are in a hole first stop digging'.

The provision of a further 20,000 troops (when according to expert military opinion 50,000 would not effect an acceptable solution) is the reaction of some one who doesn't appear to recognise the depth and size of the hole he is in. Mr Bush is clearly in denial.

The continuing or increased presence of foreign troops in Iraq only serves to exacerbate the problem. It is in every ones interest that we withdraw. Once the Iraq Government has decided on the solution to the debacle (that Messrs Bush & Blair have to a large part created) it is to be hoped that the peaceful aid we provide over the next three years will at least equal the amount we have spent in the past three creating the problem.

The deplorable death of a child in Liverpool should cause us all to examine our attitude to dogs.

When I lived in Iceland the authorities and citizens had what I thought was an intelligent and appropriate attitude to the place of dogs in society. Dogs of any breed were not allowed in urban areas. They were confined to the countryside as work dogs who assisted shepherds in the control and movement of sheep.

Their exclusion from urban centres meant that there was no excrement on pavements or in parks or public open areas and there was no killing of children. As in so many other ways we can benefit from how other countries handle problems.

We really need to make our minds up whether children are more important than animals.