Features
Upwardly Mobile Incompetents
By Michael Patrick O’Leary SSAC
In 1982, I moved from Manchester to London to take up a job as assistant secretary to the SSAC (Social Security Advisory Committee) which was then chaired by Sir Arthur Armitage, who was vice-chancellor of my alma mater, Manchester University. Sir Arthur introduced me to Lady Armitage thus, “Michael has the great good fortune to be a Manchester graduate.”
Sir Arthur was a gruff old Tory with alarming eyebrows. The Masonic Temple on Great Queen Street, Covent Garden, was within easy walking distance of our offices. I once went into Sir Arthur’s office when I thought he was not there to find him changing into his Masonic gear ready for a meeting. I was unlikely to warm to a Tory Mason. I had taken part in student protests against Sir Arthur at Manchester University. Nevertheless, I became very fond of him and was sad when he died. He seemed to be bumbling and disorganized when chairing meetings but I found that the minutes wrote themselves because he had deftly shaped the discussion. His successor failed miserably to manage the committee.
SSAC meetings were attended by very senior civil servants. I was amused to note that these mandarins were avid followers of the BBC TV comedy Yes Minister. I recall standing at a urinal with the permanent secretary, Sir Geoffrey Otton, on my left and his undersecretary on my right. They were calling each other “Sir Humphrey”.
Ministers were often invited to SSAC “working lunches”. Wine was available but I stuck to orange juice and ate very little for fear that I might fall asleep in the afternoon. Some SSAC members were not so cautious. I recall one left wing member (Neil Kinnock’s GP) snoring loudly after lunch. He often spent the morning sessions reading Private Eye or the New Statesman and intervening with remarks that had nothing to do with the discussion everybody else was having. He was quite rude to other members but always friendly with me.
The Secretary of State for health and social security at that time was Norman Fowler (now Baron Fowler). He never accepted an invitation from the Committee. Another minister, Tony Newton (now Lord Newton) did attend and he was charm itself. He went out of his way to thank me. Rhodes Boyson also attended and he was a surprise. I had seen him debating in the House of Commons on the same day that I witnessed Gordon Brown’s maiden speech in 1983. I took the easy lefty’s view of Boyson as a reactionary cretin. He had a very successful career in teaching and had adopted a Dickensian persona which made it easy to compare him with Wackford Squeers, the brutal headmaster of Dotheboys Hall in Nicholas Nickleby. When he came to lunch he was very affable. I was doing my best to keep in the background while he was introduced to Sir Arthur. Boyson ignored Sir Arthur and made a beeline for me.
“Never mind about him. Who’s this fellow here?” he boomed in his Rochdale accent as he grasped me firmly by the hand. He had joined forces with academics AE Dyson and CB Cox, editors of the Critical Quarterly (to which I subscribed when a sixth former) to publish the Black Papers, which argued a hard line on education. I was rather hurt when Cox called me an idle bastard because he was less than impressed with an essay I had written on TS Eliot while at Manchester University. Boyson was described in a Guardian obituary as “more intelligent than he was shrewd.”
One of the SSAC members I got on well with was Henry Hodge, who was well known in left circles as a human rights lawyer. He later became a judge, which was unusual for someone who was a solicitor not a barrister. His wife was Margaret Hodge, who was then leader of Islington council, which was characterized by the right-wing press as “Loony Left”. SSAC held a meeting every year in Belfast and I went there twice. We had dinner at a hotel out in the countryside and Chris Patten, who was then a junior minister at the Northern Ireland department, was invited. Henry introduced me to his old friend from their Balliol, Oxford days. I noticed when I went to the toilet that a large man was in an ante room cleaning a gun. This was Patten’s bodyguard. Patten said that he had that very day upset the Reverend Ian Paisley by saying “Derry” instead of “Londonderry”. Derry is what Catholics call the city. Patten is a Catholic.
Another SSAC member I got on well with was the Reverend Harold Good. I have communicated with Harold in recent years. He is mentioned in two books about the Northern Ireland peace process as being a crucial actor in the talks on decommissioning of IRA arms. Although he is a protestant, Harold said he was proud to call Martin McGuinness his friend.
We had meetings at Stormont and during a break I went to the gents. I hope that I do not give the impression that I am constantly hanging around toilets. While I was relieving myself, a cheery voice called out, “good morning to you.” I responded and noted that my greeter was none other than the Reverend Martin Smyth, Grand Master of the Orange Lodge. Nearly a decade later, I enjoyed a concert of Portuguese Polyphony at St John’s, Smith Square. As I was walking from the venue, along the Thames beside Parliament, a cheery voice called out, “good evening to you.” It was the Reverend Martin Smyth. Was the man stalking me?
Tories Used to Be Human
In subsequent jobs, I had many encounters with ministers. These were Conservatives under the premierships of Margaret Thatcher and John Major. When I was working on fraud prevention, Sir Nicholas Lyell, the attorney general, praised my work. What was notable at that time was that Conservative ministers took a firmly liberal line on human rights issues. There was considerable public pressure to introduce identity cards to combat benefit fraud. Lyell and other ministers consistently resisted such calls.
When I was a ministerial adviser on child protection I provided briefing and wrote speeches for John Bowis. He was also open to liberal views. He insisted on me accompanying him when he met a Conservative MP who was arguing a case for an aggrieved constituent. The MP walked off with my umbrella. Sometime later, I was watching the news while staying with friends in the Cotswolds. The main headline was that Alan Howarth (now Lord Howarth of Newport) had left the Conservative Party and joined the Labour Party. “That’s the man who stole my umbrella!” I ejaculated.
I wrote a speech for Bowis to give to a charity called Parentline and I was in the audience when he delivered it. It was gratifying to hear people laughing at my jokes. One of the celebrity patrons of Parentline was Jane Asher, an actress who was once famous for being Paul McCartney’s girlfriend. She later married the cartoonist Gerald Scarfe and achieved fame for making cakes on TV. She donated a cake to Parentline and then sent them an invoice.
Bowis lost his Westminster seat in the 1997 Blair landslide and later served as a member of the EU parliament. My friend worked as his diary secretary in Whitehall and said he was a decent man who was a pleasure to work for (unlike Dominic Raab). There was no indication that Bowis was gay and I don’t think he was – he was married with three children- but he was well-respected by the LGBT community for his support. He served as president of Gay Conservatives, an LGBT group within the Conservative Party.
I one wrote a speech for John Major. Right at the end of my working life, I wrote a speech for Baroness Julia Cumberlege, responding to criticism by Esther Rantzen. Late one evening, I had to sit in “The Box” in the House of Lords while she delivered my speech. My job in The Box was to hand her scribbled notes to help her respond to questions from the Noble Lords. Two interventions I recall were from Gerry Fitt who had been a leading politician in Northern Ireland and Len Murray who had been general secretary of the Trades Union Congress.
Julia (I was also on first name terms with two other Lordships – Herbert Laming and Liam Donaldson) was pleased with the way the event had gone and rewarded me with a huge gin and tonic in the Lords bar. I clinked glasses with Robin Eames, The High Primate of All Ireland (a bishop not a monkey).
I had an interesting conversation with an official from the Home Office about her boss, Michael Howard, who had been criticized by one of his junior ministers, who had said that there was “something of the night” about the then Home Secretary. Howard was somewhat oleaginous but he compares well with successors such as Theresa May, Priti Patel and Suella Braverman. He also had the courage and integrity to sack Boris Johnson for lying to him.
Purging of the Talents
It is a different Tory party today, much further to the right. Human rights are under threat. Boris Johnson in his determination to “get Brexit done” at whatever cost purged the Conservative Party of all its decent and competent people. He removed the whip from 21 MPs. Removing the whip used to be rare – between 1979 and 2019 only 20 Tory MPs ever had the whip removed. The party lost a lot of talent – Philip Hammond, Dominic Grieve, Oliver Letwin, Kenneth Clarke, Nicholas Soames (Winston Churchill’s grandson), Alistair Burt (met him), Justine Greening, Amber Rudd, David Gauke, Rory Stewart, Caroline Nokes, Ed Vaizey.
Rogues’ Gallery
Today the parliamentary Conservative Party is a nest of unprincipled chancers, spivs and sexual predators. Boris Johnson was chancer in chief and is reportedly trying to take over his fan Nadine Dorries’s safe constituency in order to make a comeback. The list of rogues seems endless. David Warburton was accused by two women of sexual harassment and cocaine use; Charlie Elphicke was jailed for two years after being found guilty of three counts of sexual assault – his wife took over his seat; Matt Hancock was caught on camera embracing a woman not his wife. More seriously, as health secretary he handed out Covid contracts to his cronies and billions of taxpayers’ money was lost to fraud and waste; Chris Pincher drunkenly groped two men; Julian Knight, had the whip removed after a complaint to the Metropolitan Police. He claims that he has received blackmail threats; a still unnamed Tory MP was charged with rape; Neil Parish was caught watching porn in the House of Commons; Rob Roberts was accused of making unwanted advances to a man; Imran Ahmad Khan was jailed for 18 months for groping a 15-year-old boy; Conor Burns was cleared of allegations that he had put his hand on a man’s thigh. He claimed that the allegations were part of a politically motivated “stitch-up”.
Failing Upwards
In a recent exchange at prime minister’s questions Keir Starmer showed how failures in the probation service led to the rape and murder of Zara Aleena. The man mainly responsible for that was Christopher “Failing” Grayling. The political commentator, Ian Dunt, wrote : “Grayling is at the top of that system of failure. He is that little bit more intellectually, presentationally and ideologically useless than all the others and therefore deserves special mention. But he is merely the totem of a culture that has singularly failed the country.”
Patrick Cockburn in the i-paper describes Liz Truss’s attempted comeback as “frightening indication of how far political promotion has been detached from actual performance.” He describes her tunnel vision as being “not so different from straight stupidity… it can also attract those who mistake inflexibility for determination in pursuit of a well thought-out plan.” Britain is a country in decline and people are wishing for a “golden bullet” to reverse that decline. Some thought Brexit was the magic cure but, as well as ruining the economy, it blighted the political class by elevating “a leadership cadre poorer in quality than any other in British history. Saner and abler politicians and civil servants were systematically sieved out.”
Features
Putting people back into ‘development’ – a challenge for South
Should Sri Lanka consider an 18th IMF programme? Some academicians exploring Sri Lanka’s development prospects in depth are raising this issue. It is yet to emerge as a hot topic among policy and decision-making circles in this country but common sense would sooner rather than later dictate that it be taken up for discussion by the wider public and a decision arrived at.
The issue of an 18th IMF programme was raised with some urgency locally by none other than Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja,Visiting Senior Fellow, ODI Global London, one of whose presentations, made at the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, was highlighted in this column last week, May 7th. An IMF programme is far from the ideal way out for a bankrupt country such as Sri Lanka but a policy of economic pragmatism would indicate that there is no other way out for Sri Lanka. Such a programme is the proverbial ‘Bird in the hand’ for Sri Lanka and it may be compelled to avail of it to get itself out of the morass of economic failures it is bogged down in currently.
While local economic growth possibilities are far from encouraging at present, such prospects globally are far from bright as well. Some of the more thought-provoking data in the latter regard were disclosed by Dr. Wignaraja. For example, ‘The IMF’s April 2026 World Economic Outlook projects global growth slowing to 3.1 percent in 2026; with downside risks dominating: prolonged conflict, geopolitical fragmentation, renewed trade tensions, bearing down hardest on emergent and developing economies.’
However, as is known, an ‘IMF bailout’ is fraught with huge risks for the people of a developing country. ‘The Silver Bullet’ brings hardships for the people usually and they would be required by their governments to increasingly ‘tighten their belts’ and brace for perhaps indefinite material hardships and discontent. For Sri Lanka, the cost of living is unsettlingly high and 20 percent of the population is languishing below the poverty line of $ 3.65 per day.
These statistics should help put the spotlight on the people of a country, who are theoretically the subjects and beneficiaries of development, and one of the main reasons, in so far as democracies are concerned, for the existence of governments. Placing people at the centre of the development process is urgently needed in the global South and shifting the focus to other considerations would be tantamount to governments dabbling in misplaced priorities.
Technocrats are needed for the propelling of economic growth but a Southern country’s main approach to development cannot be entirely technocratic in nature. The well being of the people and how it is affected by such growth strategies need to be prime focuses in discussions on development. Accordingly, discourses on how poverty alleviation could be facilitated need urgent initiation and perpetuation. There is no getting away from people’s empowerment.
In the South over the decades, the above themes have been, more or less, allowed to lapse in discussions on development. With economic liberalization and ‘market economics’ being allowed to eclipse development, correctly understood, people’s well being could be said to have been downplayed by Southern governments.
The development issues of Southern publics could be also said to have been compounded over the years as a result of the hemisphere lacking a single and effective ‘voice’ that could consistently and forcefully take up its questions with the global powers and institutions that matter. That is, the South lacks an all-embracing, umbrella organization that could bring together and muster the collective will of the South and work towards the realization of its best interests.
This columnist has time and again brought up the need for concerned Southern sections to explore the potential within the now virtually moribund Non-Aligned Movement to reactivate itself and fill the above lacuna in the South’s organizational and mobilization capability. In its heyday NAM not only possessed this institutional capability but had ample ‘voice power’ in the form of its founding fathers, with Jawaharlal Nehru of India, for example, proving a power to reckon with in this regard. The lack of such leaders at present needs to be factored in as well as accounting for the South’s lack of power and presence in the deliberative forums of the world that have a bearing on the hemisphere’s well being.
The Executive Director of the RCSS, Ambassador (Retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha, articulated some interesting thoughts on the above and related questions at a forum a couple of months back. Speaking at the launching of the book authored by Prof. Gamini Keerewella titled, ‘Reimagining International Relations from a Global South Perspective’, at the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies, Colombo, Amb. Aryasinha said, among other things: ‘Historically, there is a precedent that has been realized by the Non-Aligned group of countries – unfortunately, rather than being reformed and modified at the end of the Cold War, it has been tossed away.’
The inability of the nominally existent NAM to come out of its state of veritable paralysis and voice and act in the name of the South in the current international crises lends credence to the view that the organization has allowed itself to be ‘tossed away.’ The challenge before NAM is to prove that it is by no means a spent force.
As indicted, NAM needs vibrant voices that could advocate value-based advancement for the global South. Moral principles need to triumph over Realpolitik. Such transformative changes could come to pass if there is a fresh meeting of enlightened minds within the South. Pakistan by offering to mediate in the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran, for instance, proved that there are still states within the South that could look beyond narrow self-interest and work towards some collective goals. Hopefully, Pakistan’s example will be emulated.
Along with Pakistan some Gulf states have shown willingness to work towards a de-escalation of the present hostilities in West Asia. This could be a beginning for the undertaking of more ambitious, collective projects by the South that have as their goals political solutions to current international crises. These developments prove that the South is not bereft of visionary thinking that could lay the basis for a measure of world peace. That is, there are grounds to be hopeful.
NAM needs to see it as its responsibility to make good use of these hopeful signs to bring the South together once again and work towards the realization of its founding principles, such as initiating value-based international politics and laying the basis for the collective economic betterment of Southern people.
Features
Artificial Intelligence in Academia: Menace or Tool?
(The author is on X as @sasmester)
I have often been told by university colleagues how soulless and dangerous ‘artificial intelligence’ (AI) is to academia and humanity. They lament that students no longer read anything as they can now get various AI programmes to summarise what is recommended which is mostly in the English language to Sinhala or Tamil or get easier versions in English itself. They get their assignments and even dissertations fully or partially written by AI. And I am led to believe that universities do not have reliable detection software to assess plagiarism and academic fraud that have been committed using AI beyond the software freely available on the internet with their own limitations. This is due to financial restrictions in these institutions. Even these common malpractices have been done mostly with the aid of free AI programmes which are readily available, which means cheating in this sense is free and mostly safe. For teachers, this is a ‘menace’ in the same way ‘copying’ once was. But its implications are far worse.
But given the global investments made over AI, it cannot be wished away despite the enormous negative impact its use has on the environment, particularly due to its massive demand for energy. So, AI is with us to stay, and it has a considerable role to play in human civilisation even though like most innovations and inventions, this too carries its own burden of negativity. In this context, instead of demonising AI and lamenting its replacement of human agency and ingenuity, one needs to think seriously about how to deal with and engage with it reflectively and pragmatically as there is much it can offer if people are intelligent enough to make rational and sensible choices.
When I am making these observations, I am restricting myself to a handful of practices involving only writing both in university-based examination processes and in the fields of creative writing.
My initial introduction to AI was through the Research Methods class I used to teach in New Delhi. In 2022, this class was supposed to go to Dharmshala in Uttar Pradesh for fieldwork training, and we needed to write a funding proposal quickly. One of the students in the class, already familiar with ChatGPT introduced by OpenAI as a free programme in 2022, did the proposal with its help before the two-hour class was over. I edited it soon after and sent it off to the university administration for funding which we received. That stint of field work was completed in five days and was the most detailed work undertaken as a training programme up to that time in the university which had considerable output ranging from a documentary film to a detailed ethnography based on the findings.
While the technical details, the format of the proposal and its basic writing were done by AI due to the time constraints the class faced, its fine-tuning was done by me and a few students. AI could not then and even now cannot undertake that level of specificity without close human intervention. But the film, the ethnography and the actual process of research had nothing to do with AI. It was the result of human labour, thinking, planning and at times creativity and ingenuity. This was an early example of how AI could coexist in an academic environment if its technical usefulness was clearly understood and potential for excesses was also understood. But this was a time, easily accessible AI was just emerging, and we did not know much about it. But I was fortunate enough to have intelligent students in my class who gave me a crash course into this kind of AI use, which I followed up with my own reading and experimentation later on. As a result, I am keener now to see how it can be used for the betterment of academic practice rather than taking an uncritically demonising position, which I know will not lead anywhere.
But how is this possible? The lamentations of my colleagues about the abuse of AI in academic practice is not unfounded. It is a serious threat that remains mostly unaddressed not only in our country but almost everywhere else in the world too. This is mostly because the advancements of AI even in day-to-day free usage have far exceeded any thoughts for actionable codes of ethics to ensure its practice is sensible and ethical. At the same time, I cannot see why a student should not use AI to correct his spelling and grammar in assignments. I also cannot see why a student cannot seek AI’s help to secure research material from secondary sources available online which I have been doing for years. For instance, the originals of specific books and rare manuscripts might not be available in any repositories in our part of the world. In such situations, what AI might find us is all we have access to in a world where we are restricted in our mobility due to semi-racist visa regimes of failed empires and former superpowers as well as our own lack of ability to travel due to our own unenviable economic conditions. But unfortunately, the materials we need are often only available in research centers and libraries in those nations.
Similarly, when it comes to academic prose, it makes no sense now to take years to translate works from multiple languages to Sinhala and Tamil. This has always been a time-consuming, cumbersome and expensive process. Non-availability of Sinhala and English translations of core originals in languages such as English, French, German and so on has been a long-term problem for our country. But this can now be done well – at least from English to our languages – quite quickly and with a very low margin for error by using specific AI programmes which are meant to do precisely this. What this means is a quick expansion of knowledge in local languages which would have ordinarily taken years to achieve or might not have been possible at all. But still, this needs significant human intervention and time towards perfection. However, I do not think AI-based translations work as well for fiction and poetry or creative works more generally. But the ability for AI to emulate nuance and feeling in language is fast emerging. These are two clear examples of improving technical abilities in research and writing in which AI can be of help.
But looking for sources of information with help the help of AI or using it as a tool to undertake essential translations from one language to another is quite different from simply using it without ascertaining the accuracy of collected information, getting AI to do all your work without any reflection or without any hard work at all, including engaging AI to do the final product in a writing assignment — be that a term paper or a work of fiction. If one proceeds in this direction, as many unfortunately do nowadays, then, our ability to think and be creative as a species will become diminished over time and our sense of humanity itself will take a toll. This is what my colleagues worry about when they say AI is making younger generations soulless.
It is here that ethical practices on how to use AI responsibly without compromising our sense of humanity must play a central role. But these ethical practices must be formally written and taught, followed by viable programmes for detection and publication if unethical practices are followed. This needs to be the case particularly in teaching institutions as well as the broader domain of creative writing. After all, what is the fun in reading a novel or a collection of poetry written by AI?
It is time people began to think about what AI can do in their own fields without falling prey to its power and their own laziness. This brings to my mind Geoffrey Hinton’s words: “There is no chance of stopping AI’s development. But we need to ensure alignment; to ensure it is beneficial to us …” Similarly, as Yann LeCun observed, “AI is not just about replicating human intelligence; it’s about creating intelligent systems that can surpass human limitations.” In this sense, it is up to us to find our edge in creativity and common sense to find the most sensible way forward in using AI.
Features
Engelbert’s 90th birthday bash
The legendary Engelbert Humperdinck, who is known for his hit songs such as ‘A Man Without Love’, ‘Release Me’, ‘Spanish Eyes’, ‘The Last Waltz’, ‘Am I That Easy To Forget’, ‘Ten Guitars’ and ‘I Can’t Stop Loving You’, turned 90 on 02 May, 2026, and there were some lovely Hollywood-related celebrations.
Before his birthday, Engelbert’s new single ‘I’ve Got You’ was released – on 23 April – and Engelbert had this to say: “‘I’ve Got You’ is especially close to my heart. It speaks to love, loyalty, and the quiet strength we find in one another”.
The main birthday event was held at The Starlight Cabaret, in Los Angeles, California, and Sri Lankan Raju Rasiah, now based in the States, and his wife Renuka, who are personal friends of Engelbert, were invited to participate in the celebrations, along with Ingrid Melicon – also a Sri Lankan, now domiciled in America.
The invitation said “An evening of music, memories and celebration. Let’s make it a night to remember!” And it certainly turned out to be a night never ever to be forgotten!

Invitees experienced a “magical entrance” with Engelbert’s name lighting up the screen and showing him performing his hit songs.
The invitees were also presented with a unique gift – a necklace with Engelbert’s face, engraved with the words “Remember, I Love You.”
Engelbert’s son, Bradley Dorsey, sang a tribute song ‘Only You’ for his dad, while Eddy Fisher’s daughters, Tricia and Joely, also got on stage to entertaining the distinguish gathering.
Engelbert didn’t perform but got on stage for the cutting of the birthday cake.
There was also a video compilation of birthday wishes from fellow celebrities, and the lineup included Gloria Gaynor, Micky Dolenz, Wayne Newton, Pat Boone, Lulu, Judy Collins, Deana Martin, Angélica María, Rupert Everett, Matt Goss, and more.

Birthday boy Engelbert Humperdinck
At 90, Engelbert is still performing. He’s on THE CELEBRATION TOUR for his 90th year, with over 50 international dates in 2026, including Australia, Germany, the US, and Canada. He’ll be at Massey Hall in, Toronto, on 06 October, 2026. He said: “The stage is my home… Canada has always been a highlight”.
He performed 60+ concerts, worldwide, in 2025, and says karaoke keeps his songs fresh: “Most of my songs are on karaoke because people love to sing them”.
-
News5 days agoLanka Port City officials to meet investors in Dubai
-
News2 days agoEx-SriLankan CEO’s death: Controversy surrounds execution of bail bond
-
News6 days agoSLPP expresses concern over death of former SriLankan CEO
-
Editorial7 days agoThe Vijay factor
-
News6 days agoPolice inform Fort Magistrate’s Court of finding ex-CEO of SriLankan dead under suspicious circumstances
-
Features3 days agoHigh Stakes in Pursuing corruption cases
-
Features3 days agoWhen University systems fail:Supreme Court’s landmark intervention in sexual harassment case
-
Features7 days agoPalm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka – 1
