We are – as the Sunday papers never seem to tire of reminding us – in a post- industrial age. Strikes and demonstrations are apparently old hat – as passe as last night’s limp polenta-and-endive salad at granita’s. How, then, are we to develop new forms of protest to get our point across? Its just as well we have lorry drivers, isn’t it? Not content with making our world a cheerier place with their pleasant demeanour, refined manners and considerate road sense, now they have come up with a whole new post-modern form of protest. What better way to get the subtle ties of your argument across and the people on your side than to attempt to completely ruin their day? It was a brilliant wheeze: protest against fuel prices by blocking major roads first thing an a Monday morning. The technique? Drive at walking pace down commuter routes, choke motorways by trundling along three abreast in giant, smoke-belching twelve wheelers. That’ll win hearts and minds! Or at least it would have if people had been able to tell the difference between the protest and the way truckers usually drive. Maybe it would have been more successful if more had turned up. But apparently several lorries pulled out suddenly without warning. So no change there either. It’s just as well these protests involved such stalwarts of tolerance and liberal values as truckers, taxi drivers and farmers. Obviously if the demonstrations had not been approved by the Daily Mail and were instead the work of such evil, subversive types as trade unionists, the full weight and majesty of the law’ would have been brought to bear on them in very short order indeed. Quicker than you could say “illegal secondary picket” a wall of blue serge would have appeared, only too happy to offer these enemies o( freedom a kindly-but- firm word and a perhaps-slightly-less- kindly but-a heck of-a lot-firmer truncheon! And if (hat didn’t work, a swift phone call to George “Bomber” Robertson in his deep. lead lined bunker very far indeed from any danger would produce that most feared of reprisals, the NATO air strike. Yes, freedom would be safe beneath the wings of George’s magnificently expensive flying machines, many able to stay in the air for whole minutes at a time – and all able to draw on Nato’s unparalleled experience of bombing the Bejasus out of passenger trains, tractors and television stations throughout Serbia. And a few neighbouring countries they didn’t mean to hit but hey – nobody’s perfect, eh? So just count yourself lucky today’s protestors want nothing more than the simple, God-given right to freely ply the outside lanes of our motorways at q mph, with a brick on the gas pedal, feet on the dashboard and Celine Dion’s greatest hits an the stereo. In my day, sonny demonstrators tried to under mine the very foundations of civilisation by demanding such fripperies as a job or even a living wage. Thank good-ness we have laws against such things now!

I say I say I say: what’s the difference between the SQA and the IRA? Even the CRA admit responsibility sometimes. But at least we know whose responsibility it isn’t: Sam Galbraith’s. Sam insists – and we are happy ta accept – that he doesn’t have to resign because he was only the man in charge. And Dear Leader Tony says he is an out- standing minister. Out-twisting-in the- wind minister, some might say, but they fail to appreciate the subtleties of the system. After all, the SQA’s chief executive Ron Tuck had to resign because he didn’t know what was going on. Whereas Sam doesn’t have to resign because he… didn’t know what was going on. Sorted! Even this cloud has a silver lining, though. Even a s the SQA was shedding staff faster than the Scotsman, they did have time to hire another three press officers. That the SQA had no public image left to maintain appears to have escaped it, although we hear one of these new spin morticians has come up with a brilliant idea to restore the organisation’s shattered public image’ rename it Windscale.